get_class_overview

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that by default data comes from TOC with no Unreal query, and with include_doc=True it fetches from Unreal. It also notes performance implications (100KB+ for large classes), providing valuable behavioral context.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: summary, default behavior, alternative tools, efficiency note, and Args. Well-structured and appropriately sized with no fluff.

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 output schema exists and the tool is relatively simple, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and behavioral nuances. It is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so clearly: class_name example values ('Actor', 'EditorAssetLibrary') and include_doc behavior with default value. This adds meaning beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get class overview with member name lists only (very lightweight).' It specifies the output scope and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_member_info/get_members_info by emphasizing lightweight operation.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use: for lightweight overviews, and when not: 'Use get_member_info or get_members_info to get details for specific members.' Also explains efficiency benefits for large classes, giving clear context and alternatives.

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