ue_spawn_actor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that it returns the path to the new actor and supports both built-in and custom Blueprint classes. It does not enumerate side effects or prerequisites, but for a spawn operation, this level of detail is sufficient and goes beyond the schema.

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, two sentences long, and front-loaded with the core action. It includes only essential details: the operation, the supported class range, and the return value. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 description covers the key aspects of the tool: what it does, where it operates, what classes it supports, and what it returns. The schema handles parameter details. It does not address edge cases (e.g., invalid class names) but is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 100% coverage for parameter descriptions. The description adds only marginal value by giving concrete examples of className (StaticMeshActor, PointLight) and reiterating location. It does not clarify rotation or label beyond what the schema states, so a baseline score of 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 spawns a new actor at a specified location, using a specific verb and resource. It also lists supported class types and the return value, making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like destroy or query actor tools.

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 clearly conveys when to use it: when you need to create an actor in the current level. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough that an agent can infer the appropriate use case without ambiguity.

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