lighting

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, implying mutation. The description does not disclose whether actions are synchronous, have side effects, require specific permissions, or any other behavioral traits beyond the action names. For a complex tool with many actions, this is insufficient.

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, starting with a one-sentence summary followed by a clear list of actions. It avoids unnecessary text and is well-structured for quick scanning.

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 lacks information about parameter-action mappings, return values for getters, or process details for long-running actions like bake_lighting. Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is incomplete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description in the schema. The tool description adds the action list but adds no additional meaning beyond what the enum already provides. Thus, the description adds marginal 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 'Controls Unity lighting and rendering environment' and lists specific actions like get_settings, set_settings, bake_lighting, etc. It clearly identifies the tool's domain and primary actions, distinguishing it from sibling tools that are unrelated topics.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply enumerates actions without explaining under what circumstances each action should be chosen or any prerequisites.

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