get_title_screen

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the meaning of each setting, including layering order (title2Name draws over title1Name), asset source (via list_assets), and the drawTitle flag. This provides valuable context beyond the bare tool name. It does not explicitly state side effects, but 'get' strongly implies read-only.

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, information-dense sentence. It is front-loaded with 'Get the title screen settings' and uses parentheticals to organize additional context. No filler words, though the sentence is long and could be split for readability.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by naming all returned settings and explaining their semantics. It covers what each field means and where values come from. While it doesn't specify the exact return format structure, it is sufficient for an agent to understand what will be returned.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description has no parameter information to provide, which is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving the title screen settings and enumerates exactly which settings are included: title1Name/title2Name, titleBgm, and drawTitle. This specificity distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_title_screen (the setter) and get_game_title (a different setting).

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 verb 'Get' implies this is for reading current title screen settings, and the sibling update_title_screen naturally serves as the write counterpart. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. Context is clear but not explicitly stated.

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