search_class_paths

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It discloses that the tool performs a case-insensitive substring search and adds a warning about include_properties consuming tokens. It implies read-only behavior, though it could explicitly state that it does not modify any assets.

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 well-structured: a concise summary followed by a list-style parameter explanation and clear examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is both informative and efficient.

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 covers all necessary aspects: purpose, when to use, parameter semantics, and examples. It is complete enough for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema has 0% coverage, but the description compensates thoroughly. Each parameter is explained: filter (case-insensitive substring), parent_class (with examples like 'MassEntityTraitBase'), max_results (default 50), and include_properties (token cost warning). Examples illustrate valid usage.

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 tool's purpose: 'Search for UClass types by name filter and parent class constraint.' It specifies the verb (search), resource (UClass types), and output format (full /Script/Module.ClassName paths). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_parent_classes and find_assets.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to find the correct class_path before calling set_data_asset_property with Mass Entity Config traits.' It also explains parameter purposes and gives examples. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, though the sibling context makes it clear.

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