get_object_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses what information is returned (sprite, parent, physics, event list), implying a read operation. However, it does not mention any side effects, permissions, or response format. The description adds some behavioral context but is minimal.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key information categories. No redundant words, perfectly concise for the information conveyed.

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 read-only info tool with 2 required parameters and no output schema, the description adequately describes what data is returned. It could mention response format or error conditions, but given the simplicity and lack of annotations, it is complete enough for effective usage.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description lists the types of info retrieved but does not add additional meaning to the parameters themselves. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves detailed info about an existing object including sprite, parent, physics, and event list. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('existing object'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_sprite_info or get_room_info by focusing on object-specific details.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. The description only lists what info is retrieved, but does not provide any usage context.

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