Create level / progression system (admin)

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description explicitly states 'MUTATES live game config' and advises caution and staging use. This significantly enhances the agent's understanding of the tool's impact, which the annotations alone do not convey.

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 that front-load the core purpose and critical warnings. Every sentence serves a purpose with no wasted words.

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?

The description provides enough context for a creation tool: purpose, key parameter hints, and mutation warning. No output schema exists, but the description does not explain returns; however, that is acceptable given the tool type.

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 83%, so the schema already explains most parameters. The description clarifies levelSystemTypeId and levelDetails, but this adds only marginal value beyond the existing schema descriptions.

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 creates a level system and identifies two types (XP-based, event-based). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_battlepass or create_currency, but the specific resource (level system) and mention of levelDetails set it apart adequately.

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 advises to 'confirm with the user and prefer staging,' providing explicit caution about when to use this tool. It does not mention alternatives or conditions for not using it, but the warning adds valuable guidance.

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