game_ui_popup

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

With no annotations beyond title, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Show/hide/popup', which implies mutation but does not clarify side effects, synchronization, node existence requirements, or the read-only nature of the 'get_info' action. Significant gaps in 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?

The description is a single, short sentence with no wasted words. However, it may be too brief, sacrificing detail for brevity. Still, it is front-loaded and efficient for its 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the different actions (popup_centered, popup, hide, get_info), the nodePath requirement, or return values for get_info. The agent lacks critical information to use the tool correctly.

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 describes all 5 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses verb+resource ('Show/hide/popup for Popup/Dialog/Window nodes'), clearly indicating the tool's function. However, the term 'popup' is ambiguous as both verb and noun, and the description omits the 'get_info' action present in the schema, slightly reducing clarity.

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 its many sibling UI tools (e.g., game_ui_control, game_ui_menu). The description does not state context, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent without decision support.

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