game_get_property

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

The description does not contradict any annotations (annotations lack readOnlyHint). It implies a read operation but does not disclose whether there are any side effects or performance considerations. The behavioral clarity is adequate but not thorough.

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 sentence that immediately conveys purpose, with no redundant or unnecessary words. It is well front-loaded and earns its place.

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's simplicity, the description plus schema fully cover what is needed. There is no output schema, but the return value is implied by the property name. No additional context is required.

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 100%, with clear examples for both parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('property value from any node'), and the means ('by its path'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'game_set_property' which sets properties, and 'game_get_node_info' which returns more comprehensive node data.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With over 100 sibling tools, it should at least differentiate from 'game_set_property' and 'game_get_node_info', but it does not offer any context or exclusions.

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