detect-gamemode

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Detect the gamemode', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose what the return value looks like, whether errors can occur, or any other behavioral details. This is minimal transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, though the phrase 'on game' is slightly redundant/unpolished.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is nearly adequate, but since there is no output schema, it should clarify what the result of detection is (e.g., the specific gamemode value). It also lacks context regarding how this relates to sibling tools like get-status.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Per the rubric, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4; the description adds no parameter information but none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb 'Detect' with a clear resource ('gamemode'). It clearly states what the tool does, but the phrasing 'on game' is slightly awkward and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get-status, though no sibling clearly targets gamemode detection.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get-status or other world-state tools. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues to help the agent choose this tool correctly.

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