Maa Run

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add one genuinely valuable behavioral fact: tasks consuming stone (>0) are rejected outright. However, it omits other important context such as required ADB/device connectivity, what happens on interactive prompts, and side effects on the game client.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and the rejection constraint as a clearly separated note. Efficient, though the parenthetical could arguably be trimmed.

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 and all four parameters are documented, so the remaining gap is small. The description supplies the key safety constraint (stone consumption rejection) but could mention prerequisite ADB/device setup or how batch mode interacts with interactive steps.

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% and each parameter (addr, task, batch, timeout) is documented inline, so the baseline is 3. The prose adds no new meaning about the parameters beyond restating task file scope.

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 a specific verb and resource: run a custom task defined by a TOML/JSON task file under config/tasks. This is clearly distinguishable from sibling predefined-task tools like maa_startup or maa_fight, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the phrase 'custom task' and the file location — the agent can infer this applies when a user-supplied task file exists rather than a built-in task. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternation with maa_startup or other fixed tasks.

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