Apply a sequence of moves to a game and return the final state. Stops at the first illegal move. Move objects must match play_get_moves format.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| moves | Yes | Array of move objects in the format returned by play_get_moves | |
| state | Yes | Game state object from play_create_game or play_apply_move |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds important traits: 'Stops at the first illegal move' and 'Move objects must match play_get_moves format'. It also indicates the return value is the final state, though it does not clarify whether an illegal move results in an error or a partial state.
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 three tight sentences: the primary action, the stopping behavior, and the move format constraint. Every sentence adds value, is front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no filler or redundancy.
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 tool's moderate complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential points: it returns the final state, stops at illegal moves, and specifies move format. Minor gaps include not describing the behavior with an empty moves array or whether the input state is mutated, but overall it is sufficiently complete for agent use.
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 100% with descriptions for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description mostly repeats the schema's parameter details, such as the move format, and does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The 'Stops at the first illegal move' is behavioral and not parameter-specific.
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 applies a sequence of moves and returns the final state, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the single-move sibling play_apply_move by explicitly mentioning 'sequence of moves', and the reference to play_get_moves format ties it to the play_* family.
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 provides clear context that this tool is for applying multiple moves at once and stops on illegal moves, implying it is for batch operations. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like play_apply_move for a single move or play_validate_move for pre-checking legality, so it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clear prefixes (chess_, play_, hex_, oracle_, rpg_, ti4_) that separate concerns, but overlap exists between deprecated chess_* tools and the newer play_* equivalents, plus rpg_random_encounter and oracle_encounter both generate encounters. Descriptions help disambiguate, but the redundancy could mislead agents.
Many tools follow a domain_verb_noun pattern (hex_generate_map, play_get_moves, rpg_search_entities), but there are notable exceptions like dice_roll, game_deck_create, jam_status, and random_player_order that mix noun-first and verb-last conventions. The inconsistent ordering makes it harder to predict tool names.
81 tools is excessive even for a broad games toolkit; the deprecated chess_* tools alone add unnecessary bulk. While the scope is wide, the count exceeds practical limits and could be consolidated into fewer, more focused tools.
The toolkit covers a wide variety of game needs: dice, cards, hex maps, chess, RPGs, TI4, jam management, and galleries. Minor gaps like the score tracker lacking a retrieval method and the absence of some lifecycle operations keep it from being perfect, but core workflows are well covered.
