ue_get_asset_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') but does not mention error handling, permissions, or side effects. The description adds some detail about return content but lacks deeper transparency.

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 extremely concise, with two sentences that cover purpose and usage without wasted words. It front-loads the core function and follows with a practical tip, making it 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It explains what the tool does and gives a usage hint. It could mention error behavior or the return structure, but given the simplicity, it is nearly 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 input schema already explains the single parameter (assetPath) as 'Full path to the asset', providing 100% coverage. The description does not add further parameter details, but it hints at how to obtain the path (via ue_search_assets), which is a marginal addition. 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's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed metadata about an asset'), listing concrete data points (class, size, references). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ue_search_assets by referencing it as a prerequisite, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly advises using ue_search_assets to find asset paths first, which is a clear usage guideline. It provides context but does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, so it misses a perfect score.

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