ppsspp_write32

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavior: it declares 'DESTRUCTIVE: overwrites four bytes with no undo', mentions endianness, and error conditions for address+4 and value bounds.

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?

Structured with clear headers (PURPOSE, USAGE, BEHAVIOR, RETURNS) and every sentence adds essential information. No 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, description adequately describes the return format. Covers purpose, usage, behavior, errors, and return. Complete for a 2-parameter tool.

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 already covers both parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context like little-endian and error condition 'address+4 exceeds valid memory', but the schema already defines value max. Slight enhancement.

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 explicitly states 'Write an unsigned 32-bit little-endian value to PSP memory' – a clear verb+resource. It also distinguishes from similar tools by naming ppsspp_write8, write16, and write_range.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use for 32-bit cheats and pokes — timestamps, large counters, pointers.' Then gives clear alternatives for 8/16-bit and spans, fulfilling both when-to-use and when-not-to-use.

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