set_invincible

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

Without annotations, the description bears full responsibility. 'Fetches a fresh ped handle' hints at state management but does not disclose side effects, network implications, or whether the tool requires a specific player context. The term 'toggle' is ambiguous given the 'enabled' parameter with default true.

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 short sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: the first defines the action, the second adds an operational detail. No wasted words and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple toggle with a boolean parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly adequate. However, it lacks information about error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., player existence), or behavior when the parameter is omitted. It does not explain what happens when invincibility is already enabled.

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 single boolean parameter 'enabled' has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description only says 'Toggle player invincibility' without elaborating on the parameter's effect or the default behavior. The schema already provides the parameter name and type, so the description adds minimal value.

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 'Toggle player invincibility (god mode)', which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like set_health or set_wanted_level. The mention of 'fetches a fresh ped handle first' adds a precise implementation detail.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_health or set_wanted_level. No prerequisites or context for appropriate invocation are provided.

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