unreal_workflow_preview

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits beyond the sparse annotations: the returned native plan expires after 120 seconds, material edits require exact project approval, and the plan should be applied only once. This gives the agent useful operational constraints that the 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?

Three concise sentences front-load the core purpose and then add high-value constraints: inspect-first ordering, approval requirements, 120-second expiry, and apply-once guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant filler.

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 complex nested oneOf schema, the description covers the critical workflow context: inspect first, approval gating, plan expiry, and single apply. An output schema exists, so explaining return values is unnecessary. It is complete enough for correct invocation, though it could have clarified expected_state dependencies slightly more explicitly.

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?

With no parameter descriptions in the schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by listing the valid change kinds for the 'change' parameter and implying that 'expected_state' should come from a prior inspect call. However, it does not explain the structure or origin of expected_state beyond 'Inspect first', leaving some burden on the schema's own ExpectedState description.

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 states a specific verb ('Preview') and resource ('one material scalar/vector, light intensity/color or editor camera pose change'), clearly naming the exact scope of the operation. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling workflow tools by framing the action as a preview step before apply.

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?

'Inspect first' and 'Review before using unreal_workflow_apply once' give explicit workflow sequencing: this tool sits between inspection and application. It does not enumerate conditions for choosing among all siblings, but for the intended workflow it provides clear context on when to use it.

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