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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent read, so the description focuses on what is less obvious: the dataset is vanilla game files with ~5,000 classes and include_mods broadens to Namalsk mod items. It also previews the returned fields, which matters because there is no output schema. It stops short of describing pagination behavior across the 500-page range.

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 tight sentences: what it searches, what it filters on, what it returns, and where to go instead. Scope and the routing hint are 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 an 8-parameter, zero-required search tool with no output schema, the description covers dataset scope, query semantics, filters, and return fields, and annotations cover the safety profile. Only result-paging behavior is left implicit, which the schema's page/limit bounds partially cover.

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 63%, and the description adds real meaning for query ('name in any language or by class name') and the category/tier filters. However, page, limit, and include_mods are not addressed in prose, so gaps remain for parameters the schema documents only partially.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (search the DayZ item database) with dataset scope (vanilla game files, ~5,000 classes) and supported query modes. The final sentence explicitly distinguishes it from get_item and compare_weapons, so an agent can place it among siblings.

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?

Names two alternatives with the conditions that select them: get_item for a single item's full record, compare_weapons for player damage. It also clarifies that category/tier are optional narrowing filters, leaving the core use case unambiguous.

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