List actor classes

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool invokes the `dumpactors` command and returns structured data, implying a read-only listing. However, it does not mention potential side effects, error conditions, or the format of the structured data, leaving some ambiguity.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with key information. Every word earns its place.

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 output schema covers return values, and the tool is conceptually simple. However, the missing explanation of the `instance` parameter leaves a gap in the contextual information needed to use the tool correctly. Additional mention of how `instance` relates to the game instance would make it 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 only parameter, `instance`, has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the tool description does not mention it. An agent has no way to know what instance to provide or why it defaults to 1.

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 states a specific action ('Run dumpactors and return') with a clear resource ('registered DECORATE/actor classes') and scope. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like actor_state or inspect_target, which focus on individual actors.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as actor_state or inspect_target. There are no context cues, exclusions, or examples of appropriate use cases.

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