get_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It describes a read operation ('Get information') but doesn't disclose potential error behavior (e.g., move not found), rate limits, or response structure. It is minimally adequate but lacks 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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word is necessary; no fluff or redundancy.

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 lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is functional but could hint at return fields (e.g., 'returns move stats, type, and effects'). It covers the basics but leaves the agent guessing about what 'information' entails.

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%; the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's 'The name of the move to get information about'. Per guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate since no additional parameter context is provided.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'information about a specific Pokemon move', which is distinct from sibling tools like get_pokemon (Pokemon info) or get_pokemon_type (type info). The word 'specific' implies lookup by identifier, aligning with the required parameter.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_pokemon or get_pokemon. Usage is implied (when needing move details), but no exclusions or cross-references are given.

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