Drop items

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure responsibility. It clearly states that items are moved from inventory to the ground and mentions the default to the currently held item. However, it does not disclose whether this is reversible, if any permissions are needed, or what happens when count exceeds inventory, making it somewhat shallow for a state-modifying operation.

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?

A single sentence that starts with the action verb and clearly communicates the core function. No redundant or filler content; every word serves a purpose.

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 tool with only three optional parameters and a rich schema, the description adequately sets expectations. It could mention the requirement of an online player (though the schema covers it) or that the item entity is spawned, but these are minor gaps. Overall, it is sufficient for the tool's low complexity.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the JSON schema with defaults, types, and examples, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description only echoes the default-held-item behavior already present in the schema, so it adds minimal extra meaning beyond the structured fields.

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 the specific verb 'Drop' and identifies the resource as 'items from the player's inventory' with the target 'onto the ground'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like give_item (which likely adds items to inventory) and place_block (which places blocks in the world). The default to held item is an extra useful detail.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as give_item or equip_item. The context of 'dropping onto the ground' is implied, but no exclusions or alternative naming are provided. Thus, the tool is understandable but relies on the agent's world knowledge.

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