Open Villager Trades

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

The description discloses the full behavioral flow: walking, opening, listing trades, staying open, and the error condition ('no villager nearby/found'). It adds context beyond annotations by explaining the stateful nature (stays open) and the exact return format, which is not present in annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a clear action sentence, a follow-up on lifecycle, then a concise Returns/Errors block. No redundancy or filler; every sentence adds value.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides all needed context: action, parameter source, lifecycle, return shape, and error conditions. The annotations cover safety/open-world aspects, and the description handles the rest, making it complete for selection and invocation.

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 single parameter (entity_id) already has a clear schema description, and the tool description reinforces it by adding context: 'from minecraft_get_nearby_entities' and the fallback to nearest villager. This adds meaning beyond the schema's basic description, earning above baseline.

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 a specific verb ('Walks to and opens trade') with a resource ('villager') and clearly states the outcome ('lists its available trades'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like minecraft_trade (which executes a trade) and minecraft_open_container (which is generic) by focusing on villager-specific trade opening.

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?

It explicitly mentions that the trade stays open until minecraft_close_container is called and directs the user to use minecraft_trade to execute a trade. It also specifies the input source (entity id from minecraft_get_nearby_entities or nearest villager), giving clear when-to-use and flow context.

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