add_event_command

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses insertion behavior and the page terminator reference, but lacks crucial details about side effects (e.g., does it modify the event in place?), error conditions (e.g., missing page), authorization needs, or return values. Minimal behavioral insight.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the action and key behavioral detail. No filler or repetition. Efficient and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 modifies game data with four parameters including a nested object, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits default behavior for optional pageIndex, prerequisites, return information, and potential impacts. Inadequate for a moderately complex mutation 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about insertion order ('before page terminator'), which enhances understanding of the command parameter's effect. However, it does not elaborate on parameter specifics beyond what the schema provides. Adequate but no significant added value.

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 tool adds an event command to a specific page of an event, and mentions insertion before the page terminator. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_common_event_command by focusing on map events, but the distinction is implicit from the name. The description could clarify the behavior for omitted pageIndex.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_common_event_command. The description implies usage for map events, but does not state exclusions or provide clear context differentiation. With siblings handling common events, the usage is somewhat implied but not explicit.

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