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

Annotations declare openWorldHint and mutation-ish traits, but the description adds real context beyond them: session lifetime, the 10-minute quiet timeout, what is returned (who is here, what was just said), and the identity ('violet AI tag'). This session/timeout behavior is not captured by any annotation.

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?

The core action is front-loaded ('Step into the Oasis...'), and each sentence contributes (identity, default room, return value, session lifetime). Slightly narrative but no filler sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return (who is here, what was just said), and it covers session lifecycle and identity. Sufficient for an agent to call and use it correctly, though world-selection semantics remain delegated to the schema.

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 both parameters (token, world) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the default room (saloon), adding no new format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the semantics.

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: entering the Oasis 3D world as yourself, with the default room named (saloon / THE GUTTER LIGHT). It clearly distinguishes this entry action from siblings like oasis_move, oasis_say, and oasis_leave.

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?

Explains the session model: you stay while calling oasis_* tools and are dropped after 10 quiet minutes, which tells the agent how to remain present and implicitly when to use oasis_leave. Missing an explicit statement of when-not-to-use or a named alternative, so not a 5.

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