Load ROM

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the game starts paused, returns the first screenshot after boot, and may be slow on first core download. These behavioral traits go beyond a simple 'loads a ROM' statement, though it does not mention failure modes or side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then efficiently covers the two input modes and the return behavior. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description covers the input options, the resulting state (paused), the return value (screenshot), and a timing caveat (core download). It provides an agent with enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already provides 100% parameter coverage, but the description adds crucial semantics: the mutually exclusive use of name vs. romBase64+fileName, and the requirement for fileName to have a real extension for system detection. This enriches the bare schema definitions.

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 the tool's function: 'Loads a ROM into the emulator and starts the game, paused.' It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_roms by referencing it and focusing on the loading action, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 description provides explicit usage guidance: use 'name' from list_roms for library ROMs, or romBase64+fileName for external ROMs. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like reset_emulator or control_emulator, but the pairing with list_roms gives sufficient context for when to invoke load_rom.

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