get_input_action

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

Discloses that the tool is read-only and lists returned fields. However, no error behavior is mentioned (e.g., what happens if the asset_path is invalid) and no annotations are present to supplement.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second lists returned fields. No redundancy, front-loaded with key action.

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?

Missing input parameter explanation and any usage context. Output schema exists but the description still has gaps in completeness for a simple read tool.

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 does not describe the sole parameter 'asset_path' at all, despite 0% schema coverage. The agent receives no help understanding what this parameter represents or how to format it.

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?

Clearly states 'Read all properties, triggers, and modifiers of an Input Action', specifying the verb 'Read' and the resource 'Input Action'. Also lists specific return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools that create or modify input actions.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Though the read nature is implied, the description does not directly advise when to use this tool over siblings like create_input_action or set_input_action_properties.

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