ue_open_level

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of safety disclosure. It openly states that opening a level will close the current level, which is a significant behavioral side effect. It doesn't mention return value or save behavior, but for a single-purpose open tool, this is adequate.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the side effect, then the search tip. No wasted words.

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 the low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the purpose, the key side effect, and how to find valid inputs. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 describes levelPath as 'Path to the level to open' with 100% coverage. The description adds meaning by hinting at how to source valid values (via ue_search_assets), which enriches the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 a specific action (open a level) on a specific resource (Unreal Editor level) and adds a critical consequence (closes current level), making it clear and distinguishable from sibling tools like ue_get_current_level.

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?

It explicitly tells users to use ue_search_assets with classFilter='World' to find available levels, giving an actionable alternative for the prerequisite of discovering level paths. This is concrete usage guidance beyond a simple 'when to use' statement.

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