Teleport the player

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the instant nature of the teleport and optional world/view direction, but does not mention potential side effects such as fall damage, permission requirements, or behavior when the target player is invalid. The mutation action (changing position) is evident but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 one concise sentence (14 words) that front-loads the core action and mentions optional capabilities. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 schema's full parameter coverage and the tool's simple nature, the description is mostly complete. It explains the primary purpose and optional features, but could benefit from usage guidance or behavioral caveats. Still, for an uncomplicated teleport tool, it is 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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so all 7 parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal value by summarizing coordinates, world, and view direction, but it doesn't provide additional details beyond the schema, such as defaults or edge cases.

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 clearly states the action (teleport) and the resource (player), along with optional modifiers (world, view direction). It distinguishes from siblings like move_to by explicitly using 'teleport', implying instant relocation rather than movement.

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 usage for instant player relocation but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like move_to or provide exclusions. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, leaving the agent to infer from the verb and context.

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