search_assets

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It confirms the search is a read operation, but provides no details on query behavior (e.g., substring vs exact match, case sensitivity), result format, or pagination. The description is too sparse to disclose meaningful behavioral traits beyond the operation.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. No redundant words.

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 simple search tool with one param and no output schema, the description covers the core action and scope, but it omits details about return values, query semantics, and relationship to the scan process. It is minimally viable but incomplete for an agent needing to anticipate results.

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%, with the query parameter description already stating 'asset name, type, or path'. The tool description repeats this same information, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 a specific verb (Search) and resource (assets in scanned Unreal project), and lists search dimensions (name, type, or path). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_assets_live and search_code.

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 implies the tool is for scanned (non-live) projects via the word 'scanned', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_assets_live or search_blueprint_nodes. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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