get_fps_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond annotations (e.g., no auth needs, rate limits, or side effects), but it does not contradict them and provides useful detail about the returned data.

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 front-loaded with a concise purpose sentence, followed by a structured return-value block. The returns block is dense but every field earns its place given the absence of an output schema, and the overall length is reasonable.

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 output schema provided, the description compensates by explicitly listing all returned fields, including nested performance settings and special value semantics (e.g., max_fps 0 = uncapped). For a parameterless getter, this gives the agent everything needed to understand the result.

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 per the rubric. The description does not need to explain parameter syntax, and it appropriately focuses on output semantics instead.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Retrieves current and target FPS along with performance settings and world network mode'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling getters like get_engine_info or get_rendering_settings, but the scope is distinct enough for an agent to understand.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no prerequisites or context for selecting this tool over other getters. The purpose implies a use case, but the description does not help an agent decide between it and similar sibling tools.

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