use_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions 'right-click action' but does not describe what happens if no item is held, whether the item is consumed, whether there is a cooldown, or any side effects. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity for an action tool.

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-phrased sentence that immediately states the action and the context ('right-click action'). Every word adds value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 no-parameter tool, the core action is clearly described, and the 'right-click action' hint provides useful context. However, with no annotations or output schema, the description does not cover failure conditions, prerequisites, or how it differs from the many sibling actions, leaving some gaps for an agent selecting among similar tools.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly focuses on the action itself rather than adding unnecessary parameter details, and no parameter semantics are needed.

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 clear verb ('Use/activate') and a specific resource ('currently held item'), and adds the 'right-click action' qualifier which distinguishes it from block activation (activate_block). This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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 phrase 'currently held item' implies when to use it (when the agent wants to activate the item in hand), but there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative to choose. The sibling tool activate_block provides contrast, but it is not named or discussed.

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