purchase_tile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It states the core behavior (buying a tile with gold) and implies it is a write operation. However, it does not disclose error conditions (e.g., insufficient gold) or effects on game state beyond the purchase. The mention of get_purchasable_tiles adds context about valid tiles.

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 with a single purpose sentence, a clear argument list, and a usage tip. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary 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?

Given the output schema exists, return values are not needed. The description covers purpose, parameters, and prerequisite. It could be more complete by mentioning expected success/failure behavior or validation, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

The description lists all three parameters with brief definitions (City ID, Tile X coordinate, Y coordinate), compensating for the 0% schema coverage. While adequate, it lacks details on ranges or constraints, but the integer type and typical game usage make the meanings clear.

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 'Buy' and the resource 'a tile for a city with gold'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by directing to use get_purchasable_tiles first, which is a related sibling tool.

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 advises to use get_purchasable_tiles first to see costs and options, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool and its prerequisite. This effectively differentiates from other purchase actions like purchase_item.

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