preset_library_list

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool lists files, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, destructive actions, or other behavioral traits. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 sentences long, front-loading the purpose and adding a practical usage hint. No redundant or unnecessary information is present.

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 core purpose and output usage, but lacks explanation of parameters and does not provide examples or edge cases. Given the low schema coverage, more detail on parameter behavior would improve completeness.

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 schema has two optional parameters (subfolder, extensions) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain what these parameters do or how they affect the listing. It only mentions the default library path, failing to add meaning beyond the schema.

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 downloaded files in the local library and specifies the default path. It also explains that the returned paths are intended for use with ue_import_assets, distinguishing it from download or other listing tools among siblings.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating that returned paths can be fed to ue_import_assets, making it clear when to use this tool (when needing to import previously downloaded assets). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context with siblings is sufficiently distinct.

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