get_montage_sections

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

No annotations are provided, and the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention error behavior, prerequisites, or side effects. The verb 'get' implies safety, but that is not sufficient for full transparency.

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 and front-loaded, with the purpose stated in the first line and an Args section for the parameter. Every line adds value, and there is no redundancy or 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?

For a simple one-parameter getter with an existing output schema, the description is adequate but lacks usage guidance and differentiation from sibling tools. It does not mention potential errors or setup requirements, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 schema has no description for asset_path (0% coverage), and the description adds a minimal note: 'Unreal asset path.' This clarifies the basic meaning of the parameter, but lacks details like formatting requirements or examples, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed section list for a montage.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_montage_slots or get_montage_info by focusing on sections specifically.

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 a section list is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no comparison to siblings. It is a clear statement of purpose but lacks usage context.

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