Execute Menu Item

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

The annotation 'destructiveHint: true' already indicates destructive behavior. The description adds no further context about what destruction entails (e.g., asset modification, settings changes) or potential side effects, but it does not contradict the annotation.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loading the key action and resource. It is efficient, though it could include more detail without becoming verbose.

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 existence of an output schema and annotations, the description still feels incomplete. It does not clarify return values, error scenarios, or the scope of executable menu items, which is important for a potentially destructive action.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. 'By path' adds some meaning but lacks specifics on format, examples, or valid values for 'menu_path', leaving the agent uncertain about what to provide.

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 the verb 'execute' and the resource 'Unity menu item', with the qualifier 'by path', making it specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'manage_asset' or 'execute_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to prefer 'execute_code' or 'manage_editor'. There are no prerequisites or context about appropriate scenarios.

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