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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses the limited return shape, the multilingual matching behavior, punctuation-insensitivity, and the entity scopes. It does not mention default version or limit semantics, but those are already present in the schema.

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?

Three tightly written sentences: purpose/scope, output/alternative routing, and matching behavior. Every sentence earns its place and the core function is front-loaded with no filler.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete enough for correct invocation: it explains what is returned, how to get full data, which kinds are searched, and how matching behaves. Remaining details like limit and version are adequately defined in the input schema.

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 description coverage is 60%, and the description adds meaning beyond the schema for query, kinds, and lang: it names the seven entity kinds, lists supported languages, and clarifies name/id search. Limit is not described, but the schema already provides default, min, and max.

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 opens with 'Finds entities by name or id across equipment, abilities, jobs, monsters, bosses, locations and consumables', a precise verb+resource statement. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting that it returns only ids and display names, and directs to get_records or specific data tools for full data.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: if you need ids/display names, use search; if you need actual data, use get_records or a specific data tool. This is a clear condition with named alternatives, though it does not discuss every sibling such as compare_versions or query_equipment.

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