game_gamepad

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It doesn't disclose any behavioral traits beyond what is obvious: sending an event. No mention of side effects, permission requirements, rate limits, or limitations on use.

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 (7 words) with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly expanded for completeness without sacrificing conciseness.

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 simple input tool with no output schema and fully described parameters, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks context about intended use (e.g., testing, automation) but is not overly incomplete.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 sends gamepad input events, using a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('gamepad button or axis input'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like game_key_press (keyboard) and game_mouse_drag (mouse), though it could be more explicit about being used for gamepad simulation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as requiring a connected gamepad or being for testing purposes, nor does it indicate when not to use it.

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