get_xr_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get' (implying read-only) but fails to describe what happens if the asset is missing, any side effects, or performance implications. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key information. However, it could be slightly expanded (e.g., noting that it reads from XRSettings.asset) without becoming verbose. Still, it effectively communicates the tool's function.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides the basic purpose. However, it lacks details about the output format or structure of XR/VR settings, which would help an agent understand what to expect. The completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description's role in parameter semantics is minimal. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adequately describes the tool as parameterless. No additional information is needed.

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 specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'XR/VR project settings (XRSettings.asset)', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_audio_settings, get_physics_settings, etc., by targeting a specific domain.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or any context for use. Given the large number of sibling tools, explicit usage guidance would be beneficial.

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