list_actors

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It adds context about the 'loaded level' scope, but doesn't explicitly state that the operation is read-only, doesn't mention ordering or performance characteristics, and doesn't clarify what happens if no level is loaded. It is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and structured with a clean Args block. Every sentence contributes meaning without repetition or fluff.

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 simple list tool with an output schema, the description is fairly complete: it explains purpose, scope, and parameters. However, it doesn't address usage guidance or potential edge cases like empty levels, which keeps it from being a 5.

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 adds full meaning for both parameters beyond the schema. It explains class_name as a case-insensitive substring filter with an example, and limit as a maximum count. Since schema descriptions are absent (0% coverage), this substantial explanation is valuable.

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 states 'List actors currently placed in the loaded level' with a specific verb 'list', a clear resource ('actors'), and a scope ('in the loaded level'). This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like get_selected_actors or list_content_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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that get_selected_actors should be used for a subset, or that delete_actor/spawn_actor are related. Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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