get_available_materials

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

No annotations exist. The description explains parameters but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether results are sorted, if duplicates are possible, or if the list includes only materials currently used. The 'use sparingly' note on max_results=0 provides minor behavioral insight, but overall depth is lacking.

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 concise, with a clear purpose sentence followed by a labeled Args section. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the main action. No redundant phrasing.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks clarification on what 'available' means (e.g., only in content browser, or including those in maps). It is mostly complete for a list tool with good sibling context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: search_path (root to scan), include_engine_materials (include engine materials), filter (case-insensitive substring), max_results (cap). This provides meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 'List materials that can be applied to objects' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_material' (creates) and 'apply_material_to_actor' (applies), making its role unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for listing materials, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives (e.g., 'get_material_info' for details, 'search_material_functions' for functions). No exclusions or when-not-to-use are given.

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