craft_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'using available materials' but does not state that crafting consumes materials, may require known recipes, or can fail. This leaves important side effects unclear for the agent.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and its prerequisite. It contains no filler or redundancy, making it concise and easy to parse.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits critical details such as material consumption, recipe requirements, and failure conditions. The agent would need to look at sibling tools like get_recipes to fully understand crafting mechanics, but the description itself does not guide the agent.

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 100% for both parameters (itemName and count), so the schema already provides their meaning. The description does not add any extra parameter context, so the baseline score of 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 'Craft an item using available materials' clearly identifies the action (craft), the resource (item), and the prerequisite (materials). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recipes (which lists recipes) and use_item (which uses existing items), so the purpose is 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 implies that crafting is done when you have materials, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_recipes or get_inventory. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so the agent must infer the appropriate context.

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