list_collection_content_menus

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: it discloses an auth requirement ('Requires login'), a timing/sequencing constraint ('Wait for UPDATE GAME'), and a read-only guarantee ('Does not change the form'). It stops short of describing return shape, but an output schema exists to cover that.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and keeps the enumeration tight; each clause adds information. Slightly list-heavy but no wasted sentences.

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?

Covers the safety profile, auth requirement, and timing for a moderately complex browser-automation tool, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. The unexplained parameters, especially the required edit_path, leave a meaningful gap.

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% and neither parameter is explained: edit_path is never named (only implied by 'edit form'), and wait_ms is not mentioned at all despite the loose 'Wait for UPDATE GAME' hint. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 specific verb (List) and resource (extras widgets on a collection edit form), and enumerates the concrete widget types (Add DLC dropdown, owned DLC, addon/pack checkboxes, GAME EDITION text). This is far more specific than a tautology, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_collection_game_options or list_related_content.

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?

Offers prerequisite context ('Requires login', 'Wait for UPDATE GAME') and a safety note ('Does not change the form'), which implies when the tool is usable. However, it never states when to choose this over the sibling listing tools, so usage is implied rather than guided.

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