get_level_info

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'update spatial context' implying a write operation, but does not explain what is updated or whether changes are reversible. This leaves critical behavioral gaps.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, the 'and update spatial context' clause feels tacked on and could be separated for clarity. Overall efficient but could be more structured.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema, so structural completeness is adequate. However, the ambiguity about side effects and lack of usage context leaves gaps in understanding the tool's full behavior, making it only minimally complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the description provides no contradictory or unnecessary parameter info.

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 'Get information about the current Unreal Engine level' which gives a clear verb and resource, but adds 'and update spatial context' which introduces ambiguity about whether the tool has write side effects. This blurs the purpose and fails to differentiate from sibling 'get_spatial_context'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_spatial_context' or 'list_level_actors'. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or contrasting cases.

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