get_tile_ids_for_tileset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It explains the return structure (categories, fields) but does not explicitly state it is read-only or mention any side effects. For a simple getter, the description is mostly adequate but could be more explicit about being non-destructive.

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 concise, using three sentences to convey purpose, return structure, and use cases. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers what is returned (categories, fields) and why to use it. It does not mention error handling or output format, but for this simple tool it is sufficiently 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'tilesetId'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'The tileset ID to scan'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves categorized tile IDs for a specific tileset, and distinguishes it from other getter tools by specifying the organization into categories like ground, water, etc. The verb 'Get' and resource 'categorized tile IDs' are specific and unambiguous.

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 states use cases: 'pick specific tiles for manual map editing' and 'understand what tiles a tileset provides'. While it does not mention when not to use or alternatives, the guidance is clear and sufficient for this simple tool.

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