unreal_functional_tests

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: execution is disabled by default, configuration location is [JevEditor.FunctionalTesting], and discovery causes no tests, actor loads, or PIE sessions. This goes beyond the structured annotations and gives an agent confidence that the call has no side effects.

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?

Three tight sentences: the first leads with the purpose, the second gives configuration context, and the third reinforces the no-side-effect guarantee. There is no repetition, filler, or schema duplication.

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 zero-parameter, read-only discovery tool with an output schema, the description covers scope, configuration, and behavioral safety completely. An agent knows exactly what to expect and that no execution side effects will occur.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to document. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description's mention of what is listed (tests and PIE eligibility) is sufficient contextual value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List named project-approved functional tests and the current single PIE eligibility.' This clearly separates discovery from execution-oriented siblings such as unreal_functional_start, unreal_functional_job, and unreal_functional_cancel by stating that no tests run during discovery.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, and no named sibling or condition such as 'use before starting tests' or 'do not use for execution.' The sentence about execution being disabled hints at safe discovery, but does not tell the agent when to invoke this versus start/job/cancel.

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