add_click_effect

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the trigger event but does not explain whether the effect is additive, what the effect string format is, or how target_actor_id and args modify the behavior. Side effects or prerequisites are absent.

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 short sentence, which is efficient and front-loaded. However, it lacks any structural elements such as parameter lists or usage notes, making it under-specified for a tool with four parameters.

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 four-parameter schema and the absence of annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not cover return values, effect behavior, or parameter interactions, leaving significant ambiguity for the agent.

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%, so the description needs to explain the parameters. It only mentions 'effect' and 'source actor' without elaborating on their values or expected formats. 'target_actor_id' and 'args' are completely omitted, leaving the agent guessing.

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 tool applies an effect triggered by ACTION6 clicking the source actor, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_timer_effect by naming the click trigger. However, 'ACTION6' is an unexplained constant that slightly reduces clarity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_collision_effect or add_timer_effect. It only states what happens (an effect applies on click) without any contextual or exclusionary information.

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