Step the Simulation

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

The annotations already declare that this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description consistently describes a state-changing simulation step. It adds useful context by listing returned values, but does not cover prerequisites, permissions, or side effects beyond what annotations and the output schema provide.

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 front-loaded with the core operation and returns, followed by short examples. Every sentence adds practical value without unnecessary repetition.

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?

For a two-parameter simulation action with annotations and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the operation and return behavior, though it could state prerequisites such as being in Simulation mode before stepping.

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 coverage is only 50%, so the description must carry weight, and it does clarify that steps means Capture/Forward clicks and that rewind/backward stepping is supported. The examples map naturally to the direction enum, though defaults and limits are left to the schema.

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 and resource: advance or rewind Simulation mode by N steps, using the Capture/Forward analogy. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly name nearby alternatives such as set_simulation_mode or reset_simulation to sharpen sibling differentiation.

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 examples show forward and backward stepping, which implies when to use the tool during simulation. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over set_simulation_mode, reset_simulation, or get_simulation_events.

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