Check FireTuner connectivity and retrieve the current turn number from a loaded Civilization VI game.
Check whether the FireTuner socket is reachable and, if a game is loaded, read the current turn.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description reveals it performs a read-only check and conditional read, but does not mention possible outcomes such as errors when the socket is unreachable or behavior when no game is loaded. Since no annotations are present, this lack of detail leaves behavioral expectations unclear.
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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and avoids unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and to the point.
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 no output schema, the description should clarify return values or error conditions, but it does not. It leaves ambiguous what happens when the socket is unreachable or when no game is loaded, making it incomplete for an agent.
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?
The schema has zero parameters, and the description adds no parameter information because none exist. This is acceptable as the baseline for 0 params is 4, and no further explanation is needed.
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 clearly states the tool checks FireTuner socket reachability and reads the current turn if a game is loaded. It is specific and distinguishes itself from the sibling civ_status by focusing on the socket and turn, rather than a generic status.
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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like civ_status or rules_query. The description only states the action without specifying appropriate scenarios or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.