Import a local Unreal asset directory

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

Annotations already convey that the tool is not read-only, is idempotent, and is not destructive. The description and schema add concrete behavioral context beyond annotations, especially the guarantee that the tool 'never overwrites one' and the fact that it works across download sources. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose and output, then adds the important portability qualifier about already-downloaded Unreal packs. Every clause adds useful 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?

Between the description, annotations, and richly described schema, an agent has what it needs to call the tool: source and output directories, package filtering behavior, non-overwrite safety, and texture size constraints. The only minor gap is not explicitly routing to a sibling download/import tool, but that is not required for correct invocation.

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 has 100% description coverage: sourceDir, outputDir, packages, and maxTextureSize each have meaningful explanations, including the many-gigabytes warning for omitted packages and the texture-size cap behavior. The main description does not need to repeat parameter details, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Convert') with a precise input (a local directory of Unreal .uasset/.umap files) and output (self-contained model/scene GLBs with reconstructed PBR materials, actor transforms, and a provenance report). This clearly differentiates it from download-oriented siblings that fetch assets rather than convert local Unreal content.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: on any already-downloaded Unreal pack, independent of how it was downloaded. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions, but the local-source condition is clear enough to route an agent.

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