update_starting_position

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

With no annotations, the description must explain the mutation's safety profile. It only says 'Update', which implies a write, but doesn't disclose whether the dryRun parameter supports previews, whether the change is persisted immediately, or what the return value is. This is a significant gap for a no-annotation mutation tool.

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, succinct sentence with no fluff. It is easily scannable and front-loaded. While under-specified, the conciseness itself is strong.

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 4-parameter, mutation-focused tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits mention of the dryRun preview option, what happens on success, and any caveats about map validity. The schema covers parameters, but the description leaves the agent without a full picture of the tool's behavior.

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 description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema. However, the input schema thoroughly describes all four parameters, including the dryRun parameter's preview behavior, so the baseline of 3 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 uses the specific verb 'Update' and identifies the resource 'game starting position'. This differentiates it from read-only sibling tools like get_starting_position, but the exact semantics of what constitutes a 'starting position' (map and tile) are left to the schema.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., map must exist) or when to prefer get_starting_position or set_map_tile. The description gives zero usage context.

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