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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent read, so the description spends its words on non-obvious behavior instead: the statblock follows the dnd5e data model and sections like skills or currency stay empty in other systems. That is a genuinely useful caveat an agent would otherwise misread as missing data. It does not discuss permissions or error cases, which keeps it below 5.

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 sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then downstream dependencies, then the system caveat and the raw-document escape hatch. No filler and no repetition of the schema.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by listing the statblock contents and warning that some sections may be empty in non-dnd5e systems. For a one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 100% and the single actorId parameter is already documented in the schema as coming from actor-list or actor-filter. The description adds nothing further about the parameter's form or constraints, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get full actor details') and enumerates the returned fields (HP, AC, abilities, skills, speed, proficiency, inventory). It is clearly distinguishable from actor-list and actor-filter, which return collections rather than a full statblock.

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 the condition that selects an alternative: use uuid-resolve with "Actor.<id>" when the raw document is wanted instead of the statblock. It also states the downstream workflow (item IDs are needed by dnd5e-roll-attack, dnd5e-roll-damage, dnd5e-item-use). It stops short of telling the agent to obtain the ID via actor-list/actor-filter, but the schema covers that.

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