get_player_settings

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read operation by naming the tool 'get' and describing the output, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is safe, read-only, or free of side effects. No authentication or rate limit context is provided.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text.

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 zero-parameter, simple retrieval nature, the description is adequate but lacks detail about the output structure or any constraints. It does not explain what 'etc.' covers or how the data is formatted. For a tool that returns a set of key-value pairs, more structure would help, but it is minimally complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers parameters. The description adds value by listing examples of what is returned (product name, company, etc.), which gives context beyond the empty schema. According to the guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 that the tool retrieves Player/ProjectSettings, listing examples like product name, company, bundle ID, version. This specifies the resource and the type of data returned. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_project_info', which might also return project-related settings, so it's not a perfect 5.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_project_info' or other getters. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is particularly suited.

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