Craft Item

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

With annotations indicating readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, the description adds valuable behavioral context: ingredient requirements, crafting table proximity, return format, and common errors. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 efficiently front-loaded with the main action, then covers crafting table usage, return format, and errors in a compact, well-organized manner. Every sentence contributes essential information with no redundancy.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explicitly states the return shape and error conditions. It also provides prerequisite guidance (ingredients, crafting table) and cross-references to sibling tools for setup. This is complete for a crafting tool with 3 parameters.

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 67%. The description adds meaningful explanation for use_crafting_table (when true, requires nearby table) and clarifies item_name via example. The count parameter is self-evident from its name, schema constraints, and default.

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 uses the specific verb 'Crafts' and clearly identifies the resource (an item via a recipe). It distinguishes from siblings like minecraft_give_item by emphasizing the recipe-based crafting process.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use a crafting table (3x3 recipes) and directs to minecraft_find_block or minecraft_place_block for setup. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools, but the prerequisites and error conditions give strong usage guidance.

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