spawn_actor

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only explains parameter formats (e.g., arrays for transform) but does not mention side effects, return values, or whether the tool requires special permissions. The creation action is implied but not elaborated.

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?

Description is very concise, with purpose stated first, followed by parameter specifics in a structured note. No wasted words, easy to scan.

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 5 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the main actor class and transform parameters but omits 'label'. It also doesn't mention default values. Adequate but not fully complete for all parameters.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains actor_class accepted formats and that location/rotation/scale are [x,y,z] arrays. However, the 'label' parameter is completely omitted, leaving a gap. Coverage of 4 out of 5 parameters partially compensates.

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 'Spawn an actor from a class', which is a specific verb+resource. It explains acceptable class formats, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'spawn_static_mesh', which could be confused.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spawn_static_mesh or set_actor_transform. The description does not mention prerequisites or context for usage.

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