dd2_deploy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says a copy occurs but does not state whether existing files are overwritten, whether the game must be closed, what permissions are required, or what happens on conflict. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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?

It is a single efficient sentence with the source and destination front-loaded and no wasted words. However, its brevity contributes to the behavioral and parameter gaps rather than being optimally balanced.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But for a file-copy mutation tool with no annotations and an undocumented required parameter, the description lacks critical context about overwrite behavior, prerequisites, and parameter format.

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%, and the sole required parameter `project` has no description in the schema. The description only weakly implies that `project` refers to a mod project, without explaining its format, accepted values, or path conventions.

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 states a specific verb (copy), a specific source (`src/reframework/**`), and a specific destination (`the game's reframework folder`). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling tools, which mostly control the game or inspect data, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 implies deployment but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., game closed, project selected), and no alternatives. An agent must infer that this is the step for installing a mod project's files.

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