Maa Infrast Switch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses nothing about state mutation, whether shifts replace existing assignments, whether the operator must be free, or what happens on conflict — critical for a mutation-style game automation tool.

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?

Four characters is not concise but under-specified; there is no front-loaded statement of what the tool does beyond a label. Brevity here reflects missing content rather than efficient writing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the description leaves the core operation undefined for a two-parameter mutating tool with no annotations. An agent cannot reliably know what this call changes in game state.

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%: both parameters (room with enumerated values, operator) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no extra meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies when structured data does the heavy lifting.

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?

"基建换班" (infrastructure shift change) is a near-restatement of the title with no expansion. It hints at swapping personnel in the base facility but doesn't specify the operation, scope, or how it differs from siblings like maa_infrast_manage or maa_infrast_production.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many maa_infrast_* siblings. The agent is left to infer everything from a four-character phrase.

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