Create Play Session

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

Annotations are minimal (all false hints, indicating this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation), so the description carries the burden. It adds genuinely useful behavioral context: hosted creation requires authentication, is saved by default, and local creation lasts only for the server process. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the purpose and packs the two mode behaviors efficiently. No wasted words, though the two clauses could arguably be split for readability.

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?

Complete for a zero-parameter creation tool that has an output schema present. It covers the key operational distinctions (auth requirement, persistence default, process-lifespan) that an agent needs to decide between modes.

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?

Zero parameters with 100% schema coverage trivially, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameters to document, and the description appropriately does not invent any.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create an isolated Play Session'), and the qualifier 'isolated' adds scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling create tools (create_character_draft, fill_creation_holes, start_battle) by targeting a distinct resource type, though it never explicitly names any sibling to contrast against.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It explains the two creation modes (hosted vs local stdio) but does not say when to prefer this over read_play_session or other creation tools. The mode detail is behavioral context, not selection guidance.

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