d2r_chargen_import

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool reads a live save from a specific path (<SAVES>/<name>.d2s) and mentions the force parameter for overwriting. However, it does not explain the behavior when force is false (likely an error), error handling, or other side effects.

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, with a clear one-line purpose followed by a structured Args section. Every sentence is informative and there is no clutter.

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 import tool with 2 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential workflow: what is imported, from where, and the optional overwrite flag. It could mention the output format (yaml file), but overall is quite 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds crucial meaning: 'name' is explained as reading a live save at a specific path, and 'force' is described as overwriting an existing file. This clarifies both parameters beyond the bare schema types.

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 action 'Import a server-synced .d2s save into chars/<name>.yaml' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling chargen tools like d2r_chargen_build, d2r_chargen_list, and d2r_chargen_validate, which handle other chargen operations.

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 usage for importing .d2s saves into yaml format, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion conditions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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