game_key_hold

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It states 'without auto-releasing' but does not explain how the hold is terminated, whether multiple holds conflict, or any side effects (e.g., on game state). The description is too minimal for a tool with no annotation support.

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 with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core function and achieves its purpose efficiently.

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 hold-key tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It misses guidance on how to stop holding (e.g., by using game_key_release or by timeout) and the interaction with game_input_state. A more complete description would clarify termination behavior.

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 both parameters (key and action) described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents parameter purpose.

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 'Hold a key down without auto-releasing' clearly specifies the verb (hold), resource (key), and effect (no auto-release). It distinguishes from sibling tools like game_key_press and game_key_release, which involve press/release actions.

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 implies use when a key should remain pressed (e.g., for continuous movement), but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like game_key_press or game_key_release, or provide any exclusion conditions.

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