yagames-publish

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds the important requirement of auth env vars and implies a state transition from moderated to published. However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., irreversibility, visibility changes, idempotency). For a simple one-parameter tool this is adequate though not rich.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action, then gives the critical precondition and authentication requirement. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

For a tool with one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when it is valid, and what environment prerequisites exist. It does not describe the result or response, but that is less critical given the simple nature of the operation.

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% and the schema already defines appId as 'Game ID'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond connecting appId to the moderated game. This aligns with the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 action ('Publish') and the resource ('a game'), with a specific precondition ('has passed moderation'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like yagames-submit-moderation (submission) and yagames-update-draft (draft editing), so an agent can immediately grasp what this tool does.

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 explicitly conditions usage on the game having passed moderation, which is the key selection criterion among siblings. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for other states, but the precondition strongly implies when not to use it. This is clear context without formal exclusions.

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