mame_capture_game_tick

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

The description discloses some behavioral details: it runs to a specific tick, snapshots registers and memory at a precise point, and mentions the lockstep primitive. However, it omits side effects, timeout behavior, return values, or any requirements for use. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only partially covers it.

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 dense sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is concise but poorly structured, packing multiple technical details into one run-on sentence that is hard 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?

Given the tool's complexity, the lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the format of the snapshot, how to interpret the output, or any constraints on addresses/registers. More context is needed for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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 description provides some parameter context by referring to 'Nth' (likely mapping to the `nth` parameter) and 'memory region' (relevant to `addr` and `len`). However, it gives no explicit mapping, and `timeout` is entirely undocumented. With schema coverage at 0%, the description only partially compensates.

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 states the core action ('Run to the Nth GAME_TICK ($3A92) and snapshot regs + a memory region'), which is specific and distinguishes it from simple register/memory read tools. However, jargon like 'prologue read', 'lockstep regsA/wramA primitive', and 'entry a7 = SP+60' obscures clarity for general users.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like mame_run_frames, mame_get_regs, or mame_read_memory, nor does it indicate prerequisites or exclusions.

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