dolphin_press_gc_buttons

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it states 'DESTRUCTIVE to controller state for the addressed port. Overwrites all input — anything you don't include is released.' It also explains default values for unspecified fields (false for buttons, 0 for axes).

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 well-structured with clear sections (PURPOSE, USAGE, BEHAVIOR, RETURNS). Every sentence is necessary and informative, no redundancy or fluff.

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 no output schema, the description includes a return format hint. It covers all aspects: purpose, usage, behavior, parameters, and return value. For a 2-parameter tool with a nested object, this is complete and leaves no ambiguity.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it lists exact button names, specifies integer ranges for analog axes (-128..127 for sticks, 0..255 for triggers), and clarifies that omitting a key leaves it at neutral. This provides actionable detail not in the schema.

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 begins with 'PURPOSE: Set GameCube controller state on a given port for one frame's worth of input.' This clearly states the specific verb (Set), resource (GameCube controller state), and scope (one frame, given port). It distinguishes from sibling tools like dolphin_press_wiimote_buttons.

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 provides explicit usage instructions: lists supported buttons and axes, explains how to hold buttons across frames by calling repeatedly, and refers to alternating with dolphin_frame_advance for TAS sequences. It gives clear context for when to use this tool and how to combine with siblings.

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