unreal_import_assets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the import mechanism (AssetImportTask), textureType compression behavior, the repo-local file requirement, and a memory exhaustion warning. It does not cover dryRun defaults or editor-open behavior, but the schema provides those defaults and the description adds meaningful operational risk detail.

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 sentences, each carrying essential information. The main action is front-loaded, texture configuration is compactly explained, and the memory warning is a valuable final note. No fluff or repetition.

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 4-parameter batch-import tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives enough to invoke it correctly: supported input types, destination format, textureType meaning, and operational caveats. The main omission is explicit handling of dryRun and allowWithEditorOpen, but those are clear from defaults and param names.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for top-level parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains textureType values and compression behavior, clarifies file must be inside the repo, and implies destination is a /Game path. However, 'name', 'dryRun', 'timeoutSeconds', and 'allowWithEditorOpen' are not described beyond their names and schema defaults.

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 verb ('batch-import'), resource (files into /Game destinations), and supported file types (FBX meshes, PNG/JPG textures, WAV). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like unreal_import_animation and asset management tools.

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 provides clear context: use when batch-importing supported asset types into UE. It also gives important operational constraints (files must live inside the repo, chunk large texture batches). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the supported file types and scope make intended usage clear.

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