set_overlay

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the purpose but omits side effects, permissions, error handling, or behavior when overlay already exists. For a UI update tool, these gaps reduce transparency.

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 very concise: three sentences plus an Args list. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence serves a distinct role. No unnecessary information.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description covers the core functionality and parameter meanings. However, it lacks details on expected behavior in edge cases or failure modes, which would make it fully complete.

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?

Although the input schema has no parameter descriptions, the tool description includes an 'Args:' section that explains the meaning of both parameters (text and state). This adds significant value beyond the schema, despite 0% 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 tool updates the in-game overlay to show Claude's status/intent, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'ask_in_game' or 'chat_post' by focusing on a UI overlay update.

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 implies use for informing the user without alt-tabbing, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives. The context of keeping user informed is clear, but no exclusions or comparisons to siblings.

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