black_souls_input

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds that inputs are 'allowlisted' and injected into the 'normal game input loop,' but lacks details on side effects, execution timing, or error conditions. Minimal additional 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?

Single sentence that delivers the core purpose without extraneous words. Highly efficient and 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?

Despite having an output schema (which partly alleviates return value explanation), the description leaves parameter semantics and behavioral details largely unexplained. Given 3 parameters and no schema descriptions, the tool description is too sparse for complete understanding.

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?

The input schema has 3 parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not explain any parameter meaning beyond 'one allowlisted input.' No value added over the enum list and integer ranges.

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 action ('inject') and resource ('normal game input loop'), specifying it's a single allowlisted input. This distinguishes it from sibling tool 'black_souls_input_sequence' which handles multiple inputs.

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 usage for single inputs but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'black_souls_input_sequence' or when not to use it. The context of sibling tools provides some inference, but no direct guidance.

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