ue_create_eqs_asset

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries behavioral disclosure. It states the asset is 'empty' and that queries/options/generators/tests are inaccessible, adding an analogy to similar Unreal Editor limitations. This sets accurate expectations for the tool's capabilities, though it doesn't mention side effects like overwriting or return values.

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?

The description is compact: one sentence for purpose, one for limitation, and a short args list with examples. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

For a two-parameter, no-output-schema creation tool, the description covers the essential purpose, limitations, and parameter formats. It doesn't mention overwrite behavior or return values, but those are less critical for an asset creation tool; still, a small gap remains.

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?

The schema defines 'name' and 'package_path' only as strings with no descriptions. The description compensates by providing concrete examples ('/Game/MyGame/AI' for package_path, 'EQS_FindCover' for name), clarifying expected formats and typical usage, though it doesn't fully explain path semantics or naming rules.

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 opens with 'Crea un asset Environment Query (EQS) vuoto', a specific verb (create) and resource (empty EQS asset). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling asset-creation tools like ue_create_blackboard or ue_create_behavior_tree.

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?

The description implies usage for creating EQS assets and explicitly warns that query details can't be configured here, directing users to the EQS Editor. However, it doesn't name specific alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it provides clear context but no explicit exclusions.

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