ue_build_start

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the build runs in background, that editor must be closed (and why), and that the tool initiates a process that requires status polling. Missing details on potential errors or locking, but sufficient for typical use.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with bold key info and bullet points. A bit verbose in places (e.g., repeating the typical sequence), but efficiently conveys essential context without extraneous words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, but description defines the tool's role in a workflow and directs to ue_build_status for results. Lacks details on return values or error handling, but adequate for a start-build operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description explains all four parameters: uproject (file path), engine_version (override), target (default Editor), configuration (enum of three values). Adds default values and usage context, compensating for lack of schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it starts compilation of the C++ module in background. It distinguishes from the sibling ue_live_compile by noting that Live Coding is insufficient for new modules, and it implies that this tool is for full builds.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly provides when to use: editor must be closed, and gives typical sequence (ue_editor_close -> ue_build_start -> ue_build_status -> ue_editor_open). It also explains why Live Coding is not sufficient, guiding the agent away from alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.