lanhu_verify_unity_prefab

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It says 'Statically verify,' which implies a non-mutating analysis, but it does not specify what checks are performed, whether any side effects exist, or what the output format is. The lack of detail is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single, tightly worded sentence that starts with the verb and immediately lists the verified items. There is no redundancy or filler, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that verifies multiple artifacts. It does not explain the verification process, what constitutes success/failure, or the role of the optional source_map parameter. With no annotations, an agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool confidently.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions covering 100% of them, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond the schema; it lists the verified artifacts but does not clarify how they map to the parameters or any constraints. Thus the description adds little value over 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 ('verify') applied to a concrete set of artifacts (prefab YAML, ownership metadata, source map, sprites, file ids). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, especially lanhu_generate_unity_prefab, which would create rather than verify.

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 offers no guidance on when to invoke this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., must be called after generation) or conditions for using the optional source map parameter. The workflow is implied by the sibling names but never stated.

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