get_abp_info

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, but it discloses none. It does not state that the operation is read-only, what happens if the asset path is invalid, or what 'core metadata' includes. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by a minimal Args block. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or padding.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. However, the description lacks usage guidance and does not clarify what 'core metadata' encompasses, leaving some ambiguity for tool selection. It is minimally viable but not comprehensive for a tool with many siblings.

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 only defines 'asset_path' as a string with a title, providing zero description coverage. The description compensates by clearly defining the parameter as an 'Unreal asset path' and offering a concrete example, which 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 retrieves 'core metadata for an AnimBlueprint', which combines a specific verb (Get) with a resource (AnimBlueprint metadata). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that target specific aspects like graphs, nodes, or state machines, though 'core metadata' remains somewhat vague.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither mentions alternatives nor provides contextual cues (e.g., 'use this for basic info before diving into graphs'). The only extra is an example asset path, which does not aid selection among the many sibling get_* tools.

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