add_game_platform_copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: idempotency ('skips if that platform copy already exists'), side-effect boundaries ('Never fills Acquisition Info', 'Never DELETE GAME'), and a dry-run mode via submit=false. It omits permission/auth requirements and error behavior, so it is not exhaustive.

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?

Dense, front-loaded, and every sentence carries distinct information (mechanism, skip condition, two invariants, dry-run flag, platform inference, digital semantics). No filler or restatement of the name.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the behavioral picture is largely complete for a mutation tool. The remaining gap is the three undocumented parameters (slug, wait_ms, collection_id) that neither schema nor description clarifies.

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 compensate. It explains submit (fill without saving), digital (only changed when passed), and platform (taken from caller or inferred from a single-option select), but leaves slug, wait_ms, and collection_id entirely unexplained.

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?

States a precise verb and resource ('Add another GAME INFORMATION copy') and even names the exact UI mechanism ('button.extra-platform on the collection edit header'). The explicit 'Never DELETE GAME' clause distinguishes it from the sibling delete_game_copy.

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?

Gives concrete usage conditions: it skips when the platform copy already exists, and 'Pass submit=false to fill the form without saving' defines a dry-run mode. It does not name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use this one, so it stops short of a full 5.

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