ue_foliage_add_instances

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

The description discloses the current-level scope and the coordinate system caveat, which adds behavioral context. However, with no annotations provided, it does not mention whether the operation is additive or replaces existing instances, nor does it discuss permissions, error handling, or the return value.

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 concise, well-structured with an Args section, and every sentence adds value. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and then provides necessary parameter details without redundancy.

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 tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential usage context: what the tool does, parameter format, and coordinate origin concerns. It omits return value and error behaviors, which would be useful but are not critical for basic selection and invocation.

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%, so the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters in detail. It defines `foliage_type_path` as the asset path and `transforms` as a list of either full transform objects or just positions, including the cm unit and origin reference tip.

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 verb ('Piazza' / places), the resource (foliage instances), and the scope ('nel livello corrente' / in the current level). It distinguishes from sibling tools like `ue_foliage_scatter` by specifying 'alle trasformate date' (at the given transforms).

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (when placing at specific transforms) and includes a practical tip about coordinate units (cm) and using `ue_list_actors` for reference if the level is far from the origin. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose clarity implies the distinction.

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