emulator_release

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the release action but doesn't explain implications: whether this is a no-op when buttons aren't held, whether it varies input state persistently, or what the 'target' parameter affects. 'Release' implies state mutation but 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?

The description is a single short sentence - concise in length. However, it's under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It gives the basic action but omits parameter explanations and usage context that would be valuable.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and 2 parameters. For a state-mutating tool that releases input buttons, the description should explain target semantics, state requirements, and interaction with hold/tap. It's far too minimal for the operational context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'for N frames' mapping to the frames parameter, but provides no meaning for 'target' (likely platform selection like gb, but undocumented). At 0% coverage with 2 parameters and no description detail about them, this scores low.

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 'Release all known buttons for N frames' clearly states the verb (release) and resource (all known buttons) with a duration parameter. However, it doesn't distinguish from the sibling tool bizhawk_release, which likely serves a similar purpose for a different platform, and 'all known buttons' is somewhat ambiguous about scope.

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention the difference from emulator_tap, emulator_hold, or the bizhawk_release sibling. The description just states what happens, not when to choose it or what state requirements exist (e.g., buttons must be held first).

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