assets_find_orphans

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

The description mentions 'heuristic guid search' and 'potential orphaned assets', setting expectations for inexact results, but does not disclose read-only nature, permissions, or other behavioral traits. No annotations are provided 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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word is informative; no redundancy or wasted text.

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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It specifies the scope (scenes/prefabs) and search method, but lacks details on return format or what constitutes an orphan beyond those references.

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 no parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics. It adds value by hinting at the search algorithm (heuristic guid search).

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 finds orphaned assets not referenced by scenes/prefabs using a heuristic guid search. It uses a specific verb and resource, and is distinct from sibling tools which focus on builds, cloudcode, and economy.

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 usage for identifying unused assets but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No comparison to other tools is given.

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