Give items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that items are added directly and bypass crafting/pickup, but it doesn't mention potential failure modes (e.g., invalid item keys, offline players), permissions, or side effects. The schema covers the online-player constraint, but the description itself is thin on behavioral depth.

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 with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core function.

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 tool's simplicity (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description plus schema provide sufficient contextual completeness. The main gap is the lack of explicit usage guidelines and failure behavior, but the tool is straightforward enough that the description is mostly adequate.

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% coverage for all parameters, including descriptions for item, count, and player. With full schema coverage, the description adds no additional parameter context, which is acceptable per baseline but doesn't elevate the score.

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 ('Add') and resource ('player's inventory'), and the parenthetical 'no crafting or pickup needed' clarifies that this bypasses game mechanics, distinguishing it from related tools like drop_item, equip_item, and get_inventory.

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?

Usage context is implied by the purpose, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusion criteria. The phrase 'no crafting or pickup needed' hints at scenarios, but it doesn't name sibling tools or provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance.

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