set_ready

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is mutating, requires being in a room, triggers a countdown when both ready, and cancels on unready/leave/disconnect. No contradictions.

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 concise (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It efficiently covers prerequisites, behavior, and return value without redundancy.

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 covers return value (updated room status), prerequisites, behavioral details, and edge cases (countdown cancellation). Complete for a simple toggle 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 coverage is 0%, so description must explain parameters. It thoroughly explains the 'ready' boolean but does not explicitly describe 'connection_id'. However, the context of toggling your own readiness implies it identifies the player.

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 action: toggling readiness in a room with explicit meaning of true/false. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings by specifying preconditions and the effect on match start.

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 a clear prerequisite (state=in_room via join_room) and describes the countdown behavior when both ready. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' but sufficiently guides usage.

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