Get Game State Snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior the schema cannot: it is a single-call full snapshot (avoiding per-tank polling) and the return is parse-friendly JSON. It does not disclose snapshot timing or coordinate-frame caveats.

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?

Two dense sentences: the return contract first, the usage cue second, with 'reload fraction (1 = ready)' giving a precise unit inline. No filler.

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 carries the burden of describing the return value and does so field by field, plus format guidance. Minor gaps remain around the JSON envelope shape and when the snapshot is taken, but nothing that would cause a mis-call.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter surface for the schema to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly spends no effort on arguments and instead documents the shape of what comes back.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('one-call snapshot') and enumerates the exact returned state: per-tank team, hp/maxHP, alive, position, yaw, reload fraction. That field-level specificity makes it unmistakably distinct from generic siblings like unity_get_scene_info or unity_get_hierarchy.

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?

Gives a clear usage window tied to a named sibling: 'Use in the drive loop before each unity_set_player_input.' It supplies the sequencing context an agent needs but names no exclusions or alternatives (e.g., that unity_get_object_info is for single-object inspection instead).

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