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

destructiveHint=true is the only structured behavioral signal, but the description does not explain what state is changed or destroyed, whether travel is reversible, permissions, costs, or rate limits. "You arrive on the world's clock" is atmospheric rather than actionable.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action, with no repetition. The second sentence is vague ("world's clock") and does not earn much, keeping it from a 5.

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 6-parameter, destructive tool with no output schema and only one annotation, the description omits return behavior, state changes, and several parameter meanings. It supplies only a high-level destination overview.

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 33%; only route and route_deposit have schema descriptions. The description maps destination modes to `to`/`route`, but stop_on, stop_at_least, idempotency_key, and the exact format of `to` (region code vs x,y vs place) are left unexplained.

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 first sentence states a concrete verb ("Walk") and resource ("anywhere"), and lists four accepted destination forms. It does not distinguish travel from the sibling move or explain what "Ember" or "world's clock" mean, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 when-to-use guidance, no when-not guidance, and no alternative sibling named. The phrase "in one call" hints at multi-stop behavior but does not explain when to choose travel over move or act.

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