misode_get_loot_tables

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry behavioral info. It implies a read-only operation by saying 'list' and includes behavioral detail (includes counts). However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key behavior. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core action.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential information (listing IDs by category, including counts). However, it could be more specific about return format (e.g., JSON list with IDs and counts). Still, given the tool's straightforward nature, it is largely complete.

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%, but schema descriptions are generic ('Minecraft version', 'Filter by category', 'Optional search query'). The description enriches the category parameter by listing the specific enum values (blocks, chests, entities, archaeology, gameplay) and adds contextual behavior (includes counts). This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 states the tool lists vanilla loot table IDs by specific categories and includes per-category counts. It clearly identifies the resource (loot tables) and the action (list), distinguishing it from sibling tools like misode_get_recipes or misode_get_generators.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. The context from sibling tools implies it is for loot table queries, but there is no mention of alternatives or constraints (e.g., only works for vanilla data).

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