game_get_ui

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

Annotations provide no behavioral hints (no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint). The description states 'Get' implying a read operation, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or how the UI elements are returned (e.g., structure, enumeration).

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 eight words with no redundant information. Every word is essential for the purpose.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description gives a basic understanding. However, it lacks information about the return format (e.g., list of element identifiers or paths), which would help the agent process results. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter details. It does not contradict the schema, so it meets the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 it gets visible UI elements, distinguishing it from sibling tools that manipulate UI (e.g., game_ui_control, game_ui_item_list). However, it could be more specific about what constitutes 'visible UI elements'.

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 like game_ui_control for manipulation. The phrase 'from the running game' implies context but does not exclude other tools explicitly.

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