Manage Asset

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds a crucial safety tip about generate_preview's large base64 blobs and search paging, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not detail other behavioral aspects like error handling or idempotency for each action.

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 very concise: one sentence for purpose, one focused tip. No redundant words, and the critical information (payload safety) is front-loaded in the tip. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's complexity (11 parameters, many actions) and the availability of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a key usage tip but lacks details on action-specific prerequisites, parameter interactions, or default behaviors. It is minimally adequate.

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 low (27%), and the description only provides semantics for a few parameters indirectly in the tip (page_size, page_number, generate_preview). Other important parameters like asset_type, properties, destination, and filter_type are not explained, leaving the agent guessing.

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 'Performs asset operations (import, create, modify, delete, etc.) in Unity.' It specifies the resource (assets) and the specific verb actions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like manage_gameobject or manage_camera which handle different entity types.

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 provides contextual guidance via a tip for search operations (paging and preview generation), which helps avoid large payloads. While it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, the scope ('asset operations') is clear from the name and list of actions, making it usable.

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