unreal_pending_plans

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains that receipts are session-bound and expire, and that they are not evidence of the current scene. This goes beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, though it does not detail all behaviors like pagination.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and uses a separate paragraph for key constraints. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool is read-only with a simple limit parameter and an output schema exists, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, the source, and critical caveats. However, it does not specify the output format, but the output schema likely handles that, so it's adequately 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?

The only parameter, 'limit', is well-defined by the schema (with default, min, max). The description does not add extra semantics, but since it's a simple, self-explanatory parameter, the schema coverage is effectively complete for the agent's needs.

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 lists 'native one-shot previews shared with Window > Jev Review', making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like unreal_workflow_preview or unreal_preview except by mentioning the specific source, which is somewhat distinct.

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?

It implies the tool is for listing previews and warns not to apply them, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It suggests a context of session-bound memory, but lacks a direct comparison to sibling tools.

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