dd2_gold

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the important non-obvious trait that a non-zero delta turns this into a mutation, which is valuable. However, it omits whether Rift Crystals are also modified, what happens if the delta exceeds the current balance, clamping/negative behavior, and whether changes persist to the save.

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?

A single tight sentence with the read purpose front-loaded and the mutation caveat appended. Slight loss of clarity from the ambiguous 'gold first' phrasing, but no wasted words.

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 no explanation. But for a tool that can mutate save data, the description is thin on limits, clamping, and whether Rift Crystals are writable — gaps an agent needs before calling with a delta.

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?

One parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that delta adds or deducts gold, but the phrase 'gold first' is cryptic and leaves unresolved whether Rift Crystals are affected by the same delta or whether a second call 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 names a specific verb (read) and specific resources (gold and Rift Crystals), and flags the secondary write path via delta. It is clear what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with siblings like dd2_give_item or dd2_status.

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?

Usage is only implied: read gold/RC, or pass a delta to modify. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over dd2_give_item or dd2_items, and no stated preconditions (e.g., needing dd2_status or a loaded save first).

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