maya_unreal_check_materials

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

The description discloses that it does not change the scene, which is a key behavioral trait. It also enumerates what it checks. Since no annotations are provided, this is helpful, though it does not describe return values or side effects beyond being read-only.

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?

Structured with a lead statement, rationale, check list, and parameter descriptions. Efficient for the information conveyed, front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The description covers purpose, parameters, and safety but omits what the tool returns or how results are presented. Without an output schema, the agent doesn't know what to expect from the invocation, leaving a gap in completeness.

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?

The description explains both parameters: 'objects' defaults to selection then all meshes if empty, and 'prefix' is the expected material prefix with Unreal convention 'M_'. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 audits material slots and lists specific check items (slot count, default material, naming, face assignment, unused shading groups). The verb '감사합니다' (audit) plus '머티리얼 슬롯' (material slots) is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like skeleton checks.

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?

States it is worth checking before export due to draw call impact, providing clear when-to-use context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it lacks exclusion guidance.

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