game_os_info

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

Annotations are minimal (only title); description bears full burden. It lists what info is gathered but does not mention side effects, permissions, or return format. It is clear that it is a read-only operation, but additional context (e.g., no destructive actions) would improve transparency.

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, front-loaded with key action and resource. No 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?

No output schema or annotations beyond title. Description lists info categories but does not specify structure (e.g., dictionary keys, types). For a simple tool, it is adequate but could be more complete.

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, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by listing the categories of info returned, going beyond the empty schema. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves system information (platform, locale, screen, adapter, memory). The verb 'Get' and resource 'info' are specific, and it is distinct from sibling tools like game_locale which is more narrow.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies it is for gathering OS info, and there are no alternative tools for the same purpose, but no exclusions are given.

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