kotor_describe_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Read-only,' indicating no destructive side effects. But it does not disclose other behaviors like whether it requires an installed game or reads from archives. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but 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?

The description is extremely concise: one sentence plus the 'Read-only' tag. It front-loads the purpose and lists key outputs without unnecessary words. Every element 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?

Given no output schema, the description lists output components (ARE, LYT, WOK, resources, scripts), giving a solid picture of what the tool returns. Parameters are fully covered. For a module analysis tool with many siblings, this is sufficiently complete, though it could mention the format or structure of the output.

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 descriptions for both parameters (game and module_root). The description adds 'full module analysis' but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Thus, 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?

Description explicitly states 'full module analysis' and lists specific components (ARE, LYT rooms, WOK list, resource counts, scripts), making the purpose clear. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kotor_describe_dlg or kotor_describe_jrl, which is a minor gap.

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 phrase 'Use when you need full module analysis' provides clear context for when to use this tool. It also notes 'Read-only.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for more specific needs, which would improve guidance.

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