ue5_list_assets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It conveys a non-mutating discovery intent, states the content-folder default, and explains the recursive flag's subfolder walk. It omits output-format details but does not mislead.

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 English text is compact and front-loaded: primary action first, then usage context, then the recursive note. The Chinese translation adds some duplication but serves bilingual users without becoming bloated.

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?

For a simple two-parameter list operation, the description covers the root default, recursion behavior, and discovery purpose, which is enough to invoke correctly. The lack of an output schema and annotations makes return-shape details a minor gap, but not a blocking one.

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 input schema already covers both parameters fully, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the /Game default and restates recursive behavior, but it does not substantially extend what the schema already documents.

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 opening phrase 'List asset paths under a content folder' states a concrete verb and resource, and 'Use to discover what exists before reading or editing' positions it as a discovery tool. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling reader/editor tools such as ue5_read_blueprint or ue5_delete_asset.

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?

'Use to discover what exists before reading or editing' gives a clear workflow context for when to call this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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