black_souls_advance_dialogue

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

Annotations provide no hints (all false), so description should disclose side effects. It does not explain what happens if no dialogue is active, if timeout occurs, or the outcome of advancing beyond dialogue end. Only implies mutation and progression.

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 sentence is maximally concise and front-loaded, containing core functionality without fluff. Every word serves a purpose.

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 an output schema exists but is not described, the description omits return values, error scenarios, and behavior on dialogue termination vs choice appearance. For a tool with many siblings, this leaves important gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description only correlates 'choice_index' to 'selecting a choice' implicitly, but does not explain 'timeout_ms' (e.g., max wait per advance) or 'max_advances' (e.g., number of line skips). Agents would need to infer their 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 clearly states the verb 'advance' and the resource 'active dialogue', specifying it continues until dialogue ends or a choice appears, with optional choice selection. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like black_souls_input.

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 like input sequences or when to avoid it. No prerequisites mentioned, e.g., ensuring dialogue is active.

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