game_lives

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination behavior ('Use cursor to get next page'), which is useful, but lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'game live videos' entails (e.g., format, availability). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operational traits.

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 two short sentences with zero wasted words, front-loading the core purpose. It efficiently conveys key information, though it could be slightly more structured by separating purpose from behavioral notes. Every sentence earns its place, making it appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 has no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose and hints at pagination behavior, but lacks details on return values, error cases, or integration context. For a tool fetching 'game live videos', more context on what constitutes such videos or how they differ from other video types would enhance completeness.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by mentioning 'Use cursor to get next page', which implies a cursor-based pagination mechanism not evident from the schema. This provides useful semantic context beyond the empty schema, justifying a score above the baseline.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'game live videos', making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'page_videos' or 'profile_reels' by specifying 'game live' content, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools. The purpose is specific but could be more precise about what distinguishes it from other video-fetching tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'page_videos', 'profile_reels', or 'search_video'. It mentions pagination with 'Use cursor to get next page', which implies usage for sequential data retrieval, but offers no context on prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative scenarios with sibling tools.

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