launch_game

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It explains that the game runs as a separate child process, the window opens normally, the account is offline, and parameters modify defaults. This is far beyond a minimal 'launches a game' statement and provides meaningful behavioral context.

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 three sentences: purpose, parameter meanings, and runtime behavior. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy, and the most important purpose is front-loaded.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is quite complete: it covers all inputs and the execution model. It could be more complete by mentioning prerequisites (e.g., HMCL must be installed) or how to stop the launched game, but the essential information is present.

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 0%, but the description explains every parameter: version is an instance id, username defaults to Steve, maxMemory is in MB, javaPath overrides the Java used, and extraArgs are appended after the default JVM args. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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's purpose with a specific action ('Launch') and a specific resource ('a game instance'), and it adds the offline-account detail. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_hmcl (which starts the launcher) and stop_game (which stops a game).

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 some usage context by pointing to list_versions/list_modpacks for finding a version id, but it never explicitly states when to use this tool instead of alternatives or when not to use it. The correct usage is implied by the name and purpose, not spelled out.

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