get_strategy_brief

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as side effects, performance implications, file access requirements, or whether it modifies the save file. The description is minimal and leaves the agent with little additional behavioral insight beyond the tool name.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and context, achieving maximum conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what a 'formatted strategy briefing' contains, how it is formatted, what criteria it covers, or any constraints like required game state. This leaves the agent with insufficient context to set expectations.

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 100% and the parameter description is detailed ('Full path to the .Civ6Save file'). The tool's description does not add any new information about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 retrieves a 'formatted strategy briefing' from a Civ VI save file, intended for discussing strategy. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_strategic_overview' by specifying formatting and strategic discussion purpose, though the exact differentiation is not fully explicit.

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 implies usage context (discussing strategy and next moves) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_strategic_overview' or 'get_game_context'. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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