get_abp_state_machines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies read-only but is not explicitly stated. No side effects, error conditions, or performance implications are given beyond the scope of returned data.

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 concise: a single core sentence plus a parameter example. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter getter with an output schema, this description is nearly complete. The only missing elements are behaviors on invalid assets or empty results, but otherwise it covers purpose, scope, and input adequately.

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?

Despite the schema having no description, the tool description provides an inline Args section with a clear explanation and example for asset_path. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage and leaves no ambiguity about the parameter's meaning.

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 function: getting all state machines from an AnimBlueprint, including states and transitions. This specific verb+resource+POV distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_abp_graphs and get_abp_state_info.

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?

The description implies usage (when you need all state machines and their states/transitions) but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or mention exclusions. For a getter, this is adequate but not exemplary.

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