fmod_console_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it logs a message and is an alias, but doesn't disclose any side effects, whether it throws errors, or if it returns any value. The behavioral context is minimal.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences—and front-loaded with the core action. Every word is functional, no extraneous information.

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 simple tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is still incomplete. It lacks details about the parameter's type (though schema provides that), expected behavior, and any return value or confirmation. Given the tool's simplicity, a more complete description would be easy to provide.

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 description coverage is 0% (empty description for 'msg' parameter). The tool description does not add any meaning to the parameter; it only says 'Logs a message' without explaining what the message parameter accepts or its constraints.

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 logs a message, using the verb 'Logs' and resource 'message'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like fmod_console_error and fmod_console_warn by being a general log, and provides an alias to another method.

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 console_error or console_warn. The description mentions it's an alias for studio.system.print but doesn't explain when that is preferable or when not to use it.

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