update_world_environment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation ('Update') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether changes are reversible, side effects (e.g., affecting gameplay), or response format. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to scan. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying 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?

Given the complexity (mutation tool with nested objects), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like permissions or effects, and parameter documentation is insufficient. For a tool that modifies world state, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

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 schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description adds some value by listing examples of environmental properties (time, weather, lighting, etc.), which maps to the 'environment' object's nested properties. However, it doesn't explain the 'id' or 'sessionId' parameters, leaving them undocumented. Baseline is 3 as it partially compensates but not fully.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'environmental properties for a world', specifying the types of properties (time, weather, lighting, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like 'update_character' or 'update_item' by focusing on world-level environmental settings, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with similar tools like 'update_terrain'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a world ID), exclusions, or related tools like 'update_terrain' or 'create_world' for context. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate.

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