replay_recording

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions a prerequisite but does not indicate if the replay is destructive, whether it modifies game state, or what happens if no recording is available. The emoji adds minimal caution.

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 very short and front-loaded with a prerequisite. No wasted words, but could be slightly more informative while maintaining conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and minimal description, the tool misses critical context: which recording is replayed? How is it selected? Requires prior recording? No differentiation from 'replay_gameplay' sibling. Incomplete for an agent to use 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not mention the 'speed' parameter or add any context beyond the schema. No value added for parameters.

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 replays a previously recorded game session, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'replay_gameplay', which likely has similar purpose.

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?

Only a prerequisite (game must be running) is given. No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'replay_gameplay' or 'simulate_gameplay_scenario'. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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