Validate Eden Launch

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description reinforces these with 'read-only preflight'. It adds value by detailing exactly what is validated (fingerprints, title-ID compatibility, patch layout), which goes beyond the safety flags while remaining consistent with them.

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 dense sentence that leads with the action and packs in all relevant details without redundancy. Every phrase contributes to understanding the tool's scope.

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?

Despite good annotations and an output schema, the description lacks parameter semantics and usage context. With six parameters having zero schema descriptions and a large sibling set, the one-sentence overview is insufficient for confident tool selection and invocation.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the six parameters by name or explain their role (e.g., base_path, update_path, expect_patch). It offers only a high-level summary of validation areas, leaving the agent without essential input guidance.

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: 'Perform a bounded read-only preflight' and enumerates concrete checks (base/update paths, sampled fingerprints, normalized title-ID compatibility, version hints, optional LayeredFS patch layout). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like eden_start_game or eden_check_environment.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as eden_check_environment or eden_advise_compatibility. The phrase 'preflight' implies a pre-launch validation role, but there are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions stated.

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