unreal_blueprint_compile_preview

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

Discloses important behavioral traits beyond the annotations: the plan expires in 120 seconds, scene/notified object edits invalidate it, native compiler callbacks can affect other assets/instances, and effects cannot be sandboxed or rolled back. This is exactly the kind of side-effect and lifecycle context that annotations do not provide.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds essential caveats without padding. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers the key operational constraints: no actual compilation, plan expiration, invalidation, callback side effects, rollback impossibility, and exact binding requirement. It is complete enough given the output schema, though it could explicitly tell the agent to use the actual compile tool when compilation is needed.

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 description maps 'approved alias' to target_id and 'inspected editor state' to expected_state, and 'exact project binding' hints at the state fields. However, with 0% schema description coverage, it does not explain how to construct expected_state or where to obtain the approved alias. Partial compensation only.

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?

States a specific operation: 'Preview one explicit compiler run for an approved alias using inspected editor state.' The phrase 'Does not compile' immediately distinguishes it from actual compile tools. The resource and scope are clear enough that an agent can separate it from siblings like unreal_blueprint_compile.

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 clear usage context: use it to review the plan and side effects before a real compile, and it explicitly says it does not compile. However, it does not name an alternative tool or give explicit when-not-to-use conditions, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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