list_level_actors

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description discloses parameter defaults (max_results=100, include_transforms=true) and implies a read-only list operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive or safe.

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?

Description is concise with a clear one-line purpose followed by parameter details. No unnecessary words, though the parameter format could be slightly 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?

Output schema exists, so missing return value explanation is acceptable. However, the description lacks examples or edge-case handling (e.g., what happens if filter matches nothing). Adequate for a simple tool but not fully 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?

Schema coverage is 0% (only 'kwargs' with no description). The description compensates fully by detailing supported parameters (filter, include_transforms, max_results) with defaults, adding critical meaning beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'List actors in the current level' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_selected_actors' (selected actors) and 'get_level_info' (level info), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_selected_actors' or 'search_assets_recursively'. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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