start_battle

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: automatic book selection by HP, waiting for BattleSetting and Battle, configurable wait_seconds. Acceptable transparency for a start action.

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?

Description is three short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose and flow. Could be slightly tighter, but no wasted sentences. Structure helps readability.

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 an output schema exists and the tool is part of a known sequence, the description adequately covers the overall flow, parameters, and usage order. Does not detail error handling or return values, but schema compensates.

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 100% with clear descriptions for stage_id and wait_seconds. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema (auto book selection is behavioral, not semantic). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action: 'Start a battle for the given stage with automatic book selection.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like battle_loop by explaining the flow and that this is the initial step before looping.

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 explicitly says to call this after deciding which stage to play, then call battle_loop. It provides sequential context ('Flow: navigate... then call battle_loop'). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or exclusions.

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