ue_get_all_actors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states this is a read-only operation (gets a list), defines the scope (current level), describes the optional filter, and specifies the return format (actor paths). It doesn't mention potential limitations like performance with large scenes, but for a simple get-all tool this is sufficiently transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds value: the first states the core functionality, the second explains the optional filter and return value usage. This is concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the essential context: what it does, the filter option, and what it returns (actor paths) with examples of how to chain with other tools. It doesn't explain edge cases like empty levels or behavior if the level is not loaded, but given the low complexity, this is reasonably complete.

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 schema already provides full documentation for the single parameter 'classFilter' with description 'Optional class name to filter actors', achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds little beyond restating the same concept ('filter by class name to get only specific actor types'). Per the rubric, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high and description adds minimal extra meaning.

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 action ('Get a list of all actors') and the specific resource ('in the current level'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool ue_get_selected_actors by emphasizing 'all actors' rather than selected actors, and mentions the optional class filter to narrow results.

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 when to use: when you need an enumeration of all actors in the level, with optional class filtering. It also provides guidance on downstream usage by noting the returned actor paths can be used with ue_get_property or ue_call_function. It doesn't explicitly contrast with ue_get_selected_actors, but the name and context make the distinction clear.

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