kirikiri_psb_analyze_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Export' without disclosing any side effects, output format, or requirements. This is insufficient for a tool with potential write behavior via the output parameter.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and includes a necessary disambiguation. Every word earns its place, with zero fluff or redundancy.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what 'analyzer strings' are, the output format, or how this tool relates to neighboring PSB tools like kirikiri_psb_analyze or kirikiri_psb_try_recovery. Only one sibling is addressed.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only 'compress' has a description), and the tool description adds no information about the parameters. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving 'input' and 'strings' under-specified.

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 exports PSB analyzer strings for debugging/reverse engineering, using a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from vntextpatch_extractlocal for scn-to-json conversion, preventing confusion with a sibling tool.

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 provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance (NOT scn转json) and names the correct alternative (vntextpatch_extractlocal). The scope 'debug/RE' implies when to use it, making the usage context clear enough.

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