game_eval

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

No annotations exist, but the description fails to disclose that executing arbitrary GDScript can modify game state destructively, cause errors, or have performance implications. This is a critical omission for a code execution tool.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action, but it omits necessary context, slightly reducing conciseness value.

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 complexity of executing arbitrary code and no output schema, the description lacks details on return values, error behavior, side effects, and execution environment.

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% and the description adds no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. Baseline 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?

Clearly states the tool executes GDScript in the running game, distinguishing it from sibling tools like game_call_method or game_script. However, it could be more explicit about executing arbitrary code.

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 like game_call_method or game_script. No when-not or exclusion criteria provided.

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