change_government

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

No annotations exist, so the description must reveal behavioral traits. It discloses that the first switch is free (no anarchy), implying subsequent switches cause anarchy. However, it does not explain other consequences such as policy resets or prerequisites like required civics.

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 concise at three sentences, with the purpose stated first, followed by parameter info, then a key behavioral note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 single parameter and existing output schema, the description covers the core functionality and the free-switch exception. However, it omits other side effects like policy resetting and prerequisites (e.g., unlocked civic), leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 0%, so the description must add parameter meaning. It names the parameter 'government_type' and gives two example values, which provides some context beyond the raw schema. However, it does not specify the full list of valid values or format constraints.

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 verb 'Switch' and the resource 'government type', making the purpose explicit. It provides examples of valid values (GOVERNMENT_CLASSICAL_REPUBLIC, GOVERNMENT_OLIGARCHY) and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_policies' and 'set_policies'.

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 directly advises to 'Use get_policies to see current government', informing the agent when to use this tool versus a related sibling. It also describes a key condition: the first switch after unlocking a new tier is free, which guides usage timing.

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