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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false; the description adds a lot: single-creature battle with no herd dogpiling, grazer vs leviathan behavior differences, leviathan damage persistence, to-the-death vs fleeing, carcass wreck drop on kill, and the 'Target not found' error for off-POI targets. Rich behavioral context beyond the single annotation hint.

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 long parenthetical sentence densely packed. The purpose is front-loaded, but the run-on structure mixes usage, behavior, and parameter notes without separation, making it harder to scan than necessary.

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?

Covers target sourcing, POI constraint, error behavior, battle mechanics, target-type differences, loot outcomes, and relationship to attack/battle. No output schema exists, but return behavior (battle starts, carcass drops) is described. Complete for calling correctly.

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%, so baseline 3, but the description adds meaning: target_id is a creature ID from get_nearby's 'creatures' list, and it must match a creature at the current POI or you get invalid_target. It also clarifies any attack target_id works even for non-creatures.

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 (hunt) and resource (wildlife creature), and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings attack and battle (hunt queues the same action as attack; use battle for tactical control). An agent can tell precisely what this does versus nearby tools.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use (practice combat, harvest molt goods from grazers), when-not (use battle command for tactical control once engaged), and alternatives (attack accepts any target_id). Also states the prerequisite that the creature must be at your current POI.

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