game_ui_control

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only mentions 'Set' operations, but the action parameter includes 'get_info', a read operation. This inconsistency about read vs write behavior is not addressed. Additionally, no side effects, permissions, or state changes are mentioned, leaving the agent uninformed about the tool's full capabilities.

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, which is concise, but it sacrifices completeness by omitting the 'get_info' action. It is front-loaded with the main actions but could be restructured to include both set and get behaviors without significant bloat. The sentence is clear but incomplete.

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 tool has 6 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description is too brief. It fails to explain return values, behavior of the 'configure' action, effect of anchorPreset values, or how mouseFilter interacts. For a UI control tool, this lacks necessary context for correct invocation.

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?

All 6 parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing the main aspects (focus, anchors, tooltip, mouse filter) that correspond to parameter groups. However, it does not clarify the meaning of 'configure' action or the relationship between parameters and actions, and minSize is not mentioned.

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 states the tool will 'Set focus, anchors, tooltip, mouse filter on Control', clearly identifying the resource (Control node) and specific actions. This distinguishes it from other UI sibling tools that operate on different node types (e.g., game_ui_item_list, game_ui_text). However, it omits the 'get_info' action found in the parameter schema, slightly reducing clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like game_ui_text or other UI-specific tools. There are no prerequisites, context for when to use 'configure' vs specific focus actions, or hints about typical use cases. The description is purely declarative with no usage direction.

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