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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds useful state-changing behavior via the per-crop grow durations (1h/3h/6h/12h), but says nothing about cost, plot availability, cooldown, or what happens if the plot is occupied or the crop id is invalid.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the action leads and the enumerable values follow compactly with their durations inline.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The valid crop values are fully enumerated. The only gaps are preconditions (plot availability, cost/cooldown) and error behavior, which are minor for a simple game action.

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 100%, but the schema types 'crop' as a bare string with only 'crop id' as its description and no enum. The description compensates by listing the four valid crop ids, which is real meaning beyond the structured field and prevents hallucinated crop names.

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 ('Plant a crop') and enumerates the four valid crop ids with their grow durations, which lets an agent act without consulting anything else. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling 'harvest', the complementary collection tool.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb — plant when you want to start growing a crop. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no prerequisites (empty plot, cost, cooldown) and no reference to the sibling 'harvest' for the follow-up action, so the routing guidance is only partial.

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