fetch_unity_example_code

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the action (fetching source code) and the source (Unity's UI Toolkit examples repository). No mention of authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only fetch operation, the description is reasonably transparent.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action ('Fetches actual source code content...'). No unnecessary words or redundancy. Every sentence serves a purpose: first explains what it does, second explains when to use it.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose and usage. It doesn't describe the return format, but for a source code fetch, the content is typically plain text, which is implicit.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'file_path'. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing a concrete example and explaining the parameter's context (e.g., from documentation code source tags). This helps the agent understand how to populate the parameter correctly.

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?

Description clearly states the tool fetches source code from a specific file in Unity's UI Toolkit examples repository. It uses specific verbs ('fetches', 'actual source code content') and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on code source references from documentation tags like <code source='...'/>.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use: when you have a code source reference from documentation and need to see the actual implementation. While it doesn't state when not to use or name alternatives explicitly, the context signals (sibling tools) and the clear use case provide good guidance.

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