Set analog sticks

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

With annotations all set to false, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the stateful nature of sticks (omitted sticks retain their previous state), which is valuable beyond the annotations. It does not address idempotency or side effects, but the 'set' action is clear.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and a key behavioral note. No wasted words.

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 tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the core stick-setting behavior but omits important context like player targeting and the durationMs reset mechanism, which remain only in the schema. This is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 only 29% (2 of 7 params documented). The description adds range and omission semantics for the stick coordinates, partially compensating for the low coverage. However, it does not explain the 'player' parameter or the durationMs reset behavior, though durationMs is described in the schema.

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 the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Set left and/or right analog stick coordinates.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like press_buttons and touch, which handle different input types.

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?

The description gives a practical usage hint ('Omitted sticks keep their prior state'), but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, so the agent must infer tool selection from the name and context.

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