Deposit Item Into Container

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the return format ('Returns: { message }') and two specific error conditions ('no container open, or item not carried'), which are not visible in annotations. This deepens behavioral understanding without contradiction.

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 description is extremely concise: a one-sentence action, a one-line prerequisite, and a returns/errors section. Every sentence earns its place; no redundant or vague content.

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 simple inventory-to-container operation, the description covers all essential aspects: the action, the prerequisite, the return value, and likely error cases. No additional context is needed given the straightforward nature of the tool.

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?

The schema describes 'count' well (omit to deposit entire stack) but 'item_name' has no description. The tool description only indirectly hints at item_name via the error 'item not carried,' but does not clarify expected format (e.g., Minecraft item ID). With 50% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves item_name semantics incomplete.

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 description clearly states the action: 'Moves an item from the bot's inventory into the currently open container.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like minecraft_toss_item (discards) and minecraft_container_withdraw (removes from container). The verb 'Moves' and the resource are explicit.

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?

The description explicitly instructs 'Call minecraft_open_container first,' providing a clear prerequisite for use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the open-container requirement gives enough contextual guidance.

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