swu_resource_phase

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose side effects. It lists three concrete mutations: readying resources, potentially moving a card from hand to resource zone, and drawing a card. However, it omits details like session state requirements, whether the resourced card is exhausted, or failure conditions, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action verb, uses a clear sequential structure. No redundant information.

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 a simple 3-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior. However, it lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., game must be in progress) and does not map parameters to names explicitly, making it less complete than ideal.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It references resource_card ('optionally resourcing a hand card') and draw_for_turn ('drawing for turn'), but does not explain session_id or clarify that draw_for_turn can be set to false to skip drawing. Param semantics are only partially conveyed.

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's function: to advance the resource phase in a game, listing the specific actions (readying resources, optionally resourcing a hand card, drawing). It distinguishes this from sibling tools that handle other phases or actions.

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 implicitly indicates this is used during the resource phase of a turn, but provides no explicit guidance about when to use it over alternative actions like swu_take_game_action or swu_play_card. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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