Список гравців онлайн

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does convey that the tool is a read-only snapshot of currently connected players via /list, but it does not explicitly mention side effects, error cases, permissions, or that it modifies nothing on the server. This is adequate for a simple query tool but leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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 compact sentence that states what the tool returns and even includes the underlying command. Every part earns its place; there is no filler or redundant restating.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description gives the essential return semantics: кількість і ніки гравців. The only real gap is that it does not describe the exact output shape, but the simplicity of the tool makes the current level sufficient.

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 only parameter, timeout_ms, is fully documented in the schema with range and default, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional semantic detail about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Повертає' and names the exact resource: кількість і ніки гравців, підключених зараз до сервера. The parenthetical '(/list)' further anchors it to a specific command and clearly separates it from siblings like mc_teleport or mc_give.

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 gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, especially mc_command, which could theoretically also run /list. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context cues explaining when this convenience tool is the right choice.

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