lightprobe-bake

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions baking of probes and lightmaps, and hints at async vs sync behavior via parameter, but does not disclose side effects like overwriting data, performance impact, or whether saving is needed. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentences, front-loaded with action, no fluff. Every sentence adds value: purpose, prerequisite, and follow-up steps. Highly 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 no output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers the main purpose, necessary preconditions, and post-baking verification. Could elaborate on behavior (e.g., overwriting), but provides enough for a knowledgeable user in a Unity 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 covers all 3 parameters with 100% description coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, only referencing a prerequisite. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 triggers light baking, specifying it bakes Light Probe data and Lightmaps. It uses specific verbs ('Trigger', 'Bakes') and distinguishes from sibling tools like lightprobe-analyze and lightprobe-configure-lights.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: after configuring lights to Baked or Mixed mode with 'lightprobe-configure-lights', and before verifying results with 'lightprobe-analyze' and console-get-logs. Provides clear context for pre- and post-steps.

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