ai_make_move_tool

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 states 'Makes a move' implying mutation of game state, and specifies the return format. However, it does not explicitly disclose side effects (e.g., board updates, irreversibility) or error conditions. This is adequate but leaves some behavioral traits implicit.

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 three short sentences plus an Args/Returns block. It front-loads the primary purpose, includes essential usage guidance, and has no redundant words. The structure is clean and easy to parse.

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 tool with no parameters and a clear function, the description covers what it does, when to use it, and what it returns. It lacks explicit mention of side effects beyond the move and does not address error cases, but given its simplicity, it is nearly complete. A bit more detail on state changes would make it fully self-contained.

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 0 parameters, and the description simply says 'Args: None,' matching the empty schema. With zero params, the schema covers everything, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'Makes a move for the board using the AI.' It identifies the specific verb (make), resource (board), and unique mechanism (AI). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool make_move_tool by noting 'Shouldn't be used if you have a move in mind already, you should use the make_move_tool instead.'

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Always use this after the user has made a move' gives a clear condition for use, while 'Shouldn't be used if you have a move in mind already, you should use the make_move_tool instead' states when not to use it and names the alternative tool.

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