ue_landscape_set_grass

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the core toggle behavior and defines what the grass system is, but does not disclose whether the change is persistent, whether a landscape must be selected, what side effects occur, or what the return value is. This is insufficient for a mutating tool with no annotations.

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 single concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the action and the domain of the effect.

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?

This is a simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, so the description doesn't need to be extensive. It covers the core operation, but leaves gaps around the label parameter and behavioral side effects, making it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 should compensate. It implicitly maps 'enabled' to the on/off action, but it does not explain the 'label' parameter at all, and neither parameter's semantics are explicitly described beyond what the schema already shows.

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 uses a clear action ('Accende o spegne' / turns on or off) and a specific resource ('grass system del landscape'), and clarifies that this is procedural grass generated by the material. This distinguishes it from sibling landscape tools like ue_landscape_set_material or ue_landscape_import_heightmap.

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 usage context is implied: use this tool when you want to enable or disable the landscape's procedural grass. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusions/prerequisites, so guidance is minimal.

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