galbook_help

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about whether this is a read-only documentation fetch, how large the returned guidance is, or whether it changes any game state. It only implies 'this returns tips', which is barely more than the tool name.

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?

One short line with the intent front-loaded and no wasted wording. The bilingual repetition adds a little redundancy but is cheap and aids matching for non-English agents.

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?

For a zero-parameter help tool the surface area is small, so the definition is close to adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema an agent still lacks any sense of what the help covers or when to reach for it among the fifteen sibling tools.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already shows. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter-related gaps exist.

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 says it is a rules-and-tips/help document ('How to play like a human (rules and tips)'), which conveys a help resource rather than a game action, distinguishing it implicitly from siblings like galbook_next or galbook_choose. However, the phrasing is vague – 'play like a human' could be read as persona/style guidance rather than game rules, and it never says what the returned content actually covers.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this tool – not at session start, not when confused about rules, and no mention of alternatives. An agent must guess the trigger condition on its own.

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