scan_game_environment

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

Despite having no annotations, the description is highly transparent: it states it is read-only, describes the discovery order (env var, known locations, Steam libraries), lists all reported data points, and explains the nuanced 'recognized_bundle' interpretation for crash loggers. This surpasses basic behavioral disclosure.

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 dense but well-structured: a one-sentence summary, discovery details, a comprehensive report list, and usage guidance. Every sentence contributes meaningful value, and the length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden. It fully specifies what the scan discovers (game version, F4SE health, mod managers, etc.) and includes a subtle interpretation rule (recognized_bundle) that prevents misuse. This is as complete as expected for a complex diagnostic tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is no schema to add detail, and the description clarifies that the scan is fully automatic with no user input required.

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 that the tool scans the installed Fallout 4 for versions, F4SE health, and mod managers, and enumerates the specific outputs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the initial comprehensive scan in a diagnosis session.

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?

It explicitly instructs to call this tool FIRST in any diagnosis session and explains why (version mismatches explain many crashes before reading logs). It does not name alternative tools or provide when-not guidance, but the context is clear and actionable.

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