ue_editor_open

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

No annotations exist, so the description provides necessary behavioral context: it waits, mentions first startup shader compilation time, and explains wait_seconds parameter. It could detail side effects or error cases.

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 a concise docstring with a clear summary and well-structured parameter list. No unnecessary 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?

The description covers main behavior and all parameters. It lacks explicit return value information (no output schema) and prerequisites (e.g., editor state). Still, it is fairly complete for a project-opening tool.

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's Args section thoroughly explains each parameter's purpose, including uproject path, engine_version override, wait_seconds behavior, and extra_args. This adds significant meaning beyond schema.

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 the tool opens a project in the editor and waits for the Remote Control bridge, using specific verbs and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like ue_editor_close.

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 (opening and waiting) but does not explicitly mention when to use vs alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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