populate_map_events

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

Description claims random positions, but the opts parameter includes x and y fields which could allow fixed positions, creating ambiguity. Additionally, no information about side effects (overwriting, conflicts), error handling, or permissions is provided. Since annotations are absent, the description bears full responsibility but falls short.

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?

Single sentence of 16 words, front-loaded with verb and key details. No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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 complexity (4 params, nested opts, no output schema), the description is too brief. It lacks information on return values, success/failure conditions, event limits, and whether the addition is transactional. The agent has insufficient information to use the tool confidently.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the context of 'at random positions,' which is not evident from the schema. However, it does not elaborate on how opts fields like x,y interact with randomness, and no additional parameter meaning is provided. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action (add multiple events), the types (npc, chest, boss), the target (existing map), and a key behavior (random positions). This distinguishes it from siblings like create_map_event which typically adds a single event at a specified position.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_map_event or create_boss_event. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or context for its use.

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