Search prefabs

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: name=<exact> changes the result shape by returning the prefab's full XML, and it clarifies the underlying file scope. It does not mention pagination behavior, though limit/offset are schema-documented.

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 tight sentences with no filler: the search scope and fields come first, then the special exact-name behavior, then the integration hint. Every clause earns its place.

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 still conveys the key return-value nuance (full XML on exact name match) and the intended consumer (scene_edit). It omits what non-exact result rows contain, but with all 8 parameters fully described in schema and read-only annotations present, an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only the exact-vs-substring distinction between name and query, which the schema already conveys via 'Exact prefab name to show in full', so net added meaning is marginal.

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 (Searches) and resource (prefab definitions) plus the exact searchable fields (name, mesh, script, tag) and where the data lives (Modules/*/Prefabs/*.xml). This cleanly separates it from prefab_create, asset_search and search_objects, so an agent can pick it without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete downstream workflow: 'Use the names with scene_edit action=add prefab=…', which tells the agent why and when to call this. It does not explicitly exclude the overlapping siblings (asset_search, search_objects), so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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