ue_package_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states what is reported, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, blocks, or requires any prior state. Minimal behavioral context is given.

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 two efficient sentences with no fluff, front-loading the core purpose and details.

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 the main return values (phase, errors, path) but lacks explanation of the output format and the purpose of tail_lines. Given no output schema, more detail on the return structure would be helpful.

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 single parameter 'tail_lines' has no description in schema (0% coverage) and is not mentioned in the description. The description adds no meaning to this 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 it reports the status of packaging started with ue_package_start, listing the phases (Cook, Stage, Package, Archive), errors, and final executable path. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ue_package_start and ue_build_status.

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 after ue_package_start but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ue_build_status, nor mention polling frequency or when not to use.

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