game_script

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

With no annotations beyond title, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as side effects of attach/detach (e.g., file modification), permission requirements, or return format for get_source. The minimal description is insufficient for a tool that modifies game state.

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, well-formed sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with action verbs that immediately convey 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?

Despite having 4 parameters and no output schema, the description omits crucial details like what get_source returns, how source and className interact, and any prerequisites. The tool performs multiple actions but lacks the context needed for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what's in the schema, meeting baseline but not compensating for lack of context.

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 the tool's verbs and resource: attach, detach, get source of node scripts. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like attach_script by covering multiple actions.

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 game_script versus alternatives like attach_script or get_property. The agent must infer based on action parameter values.

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