ue_foliage_simulate

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the clear=True reset behavior and the simulation trigger after spawner changes, but does not mention side effects of reset (e.g., destructive), whether simulation is async, or any required editor state.

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?

Single, efficient sentence that front-loads the main action. No wasted words, and the secondary behavior (clear) is appended clearly.

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?

Despite being a simple tool, the description leaves critical context unexplained: what label refers to, what 'simulate' actually does in the engine, whether clear is irreversible, and what preconditions exist beyond 'after changing the spawner'. The brevity creates ambiguity for agent decision-making.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains clear=True but says nothing about the required 'label' parameter, leaving its meaning and usage entirely undocumented. This is a significant gap for an essential parameter.

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 simulates procedural foliage for a volume, and also describes the clear=True reset behavior. It uses a specific verb (simulate) and resource (volume foliage), distinguishing it from sibling tools like scatter or generate.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'Da chiamare dopo aver cambiato lo spawner' (to call after changing the spawner). However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, so it lacks the full exclusions of a 5.

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