game_navigation_3d

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

With no annotations, description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only lists actions without explaining effects (e.g., does 'bake' overwrite existing navmesh? Are changes reversible?). No mention of destructive potential or required permissions.

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?

Single short phrase is very concise, front-loading the purpose. Lacks structure (e.g., bullet points for actions) but trades minimalism for clarity.

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 7 parameters, three distinct actions, and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain what each action entails, return values, error handling, or typical workflow steps.

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 each parameter described. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so 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?

Description explicitly states the tool creates/configures NavigationRegion3D nodes and bakes navigation data, which is a specific resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'game_navigate_path' which handles pathfinding queries, not region setup.

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, prerequisites, or conditions for using different actions. For example, no mention of whether existing regions need to be removed first or that baking requires geometry to be present.

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