inspect_texture

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'Read structural properties' implying read-only, but does not disclose error handling, edge cases, or exact return format. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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?

Description is concise at a few sentences, listing many relevant properties without redundancy. Could be slightly tighter, but effectively communicates the tool's scope.

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?

With no output schema, the description lists properties read but does not explicitly state the return format (likely JSON). It provides sufficient detail for a read tool, but missing output structure information.

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 a single well-described parameter. The description adds context about the asset type and properties read, but adds little beyond the schema description. Baseline 3 applies.

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 it reads structural properties of UTexture assets, lists many specific properties including UTexture2D-specific ones, and distinguishes itself by pairing with configure_texture and import_texture.

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 pairs with configure_texture (mutates) and import_texture (creates), giving context on when to use this read-only tool vs alternatives. However, it doesn't exhaustively differentiate from other inspect_* tools.

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