geck_launch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the core behavior: launching GECK and optionally using fose_loader.exe -editor. However, it does not mention whether the launch blocks, what happens on failure, side effects on the environment, or whether the call returns process information.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loading the primary action 'Launch GECK' and then adding the FOSE variant concisely. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

The description covers the main launch modes and the output schema exists, so return values are not a concern. However, with three parameters and 0% schema coverage, the missing semantics for game_dir and extra_args leave the definition incomplete for anything beyond a default launch.

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 must compensate, but it only loosely implies the via_fose parameter through 'with FOSE via fose_loader.exe -editor.' It provides no explanation of game_dir or extra_args, leaving the agent without enough guidance for non-default calls.

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 begins with the specific verb 'Launch' and identifies the resource, GECK, including a distinct FOSE mode via fose_loader.exe -editor. This clearly differentiates geck_launch from all sibling tools, none of which are launch operations.

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 intended use is obvious: use this tool to start GECK, either normally or with FOSE. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but among the siblings this is the only launch operation, so the context is clear.

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