game_ui_control

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

Annotations are minimal (only title) so description carries full burden. It mentions setting properties and focus actions but does not disclose mutability, side effects (e.g., focus change impact on other UI), permissions, or reversibility. The tool likely modifies game state, but behavioral details are absent.

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, concise but lacks structure. It front-loads a list of properties but omits the key action parameter. Could be more informative without significant extra length.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling UI tools, the description is minimally complete. It does not explain the different action modes (configure, grab_focus, etc.) or specify that it only works on Control nodes. Outputs are not described.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond parameter names: 'focus, anchors, tooltip, mouse filter' map to some parameters but misses `action`, `minSize`, and `nodePath`. It does not explain the action enum or how parameters interact.

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 states it sets focus, anchors, tooltip, and mouse filter on a Control, which is clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling UI tools like game_ui_item_list or game_ui_popup, which also manipulate UI elements. The parameter `action` adds further complexity not captured in the description.

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 vs alternatives. The description does not specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools suggest many UI-related options, but no comparison is offered.

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