get_options

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

Since there are no annotations, the description takes on the full behavioral burden. It provides valuable context regarding the data format (key:value pairs), but lacks operational details like error handling or specific read restrictions.

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 single sentence is extremely efficient, front-loaded, and contains no superfluous language, earning the top score for brevity and clarity.

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?

While it explains what the result looks like (key:value pairs), it is incomplete because it fails to define the nature of the required 'instance' parameter, limiting its effectiveness for a complex agent workflow.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no semantic value to the required 'instance' parameter. It fails to define whether 'instance' refers to a path, an ID, or a configuration name, which is crucial for tool invocation.

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 is highly specific, clearly stating that it reads the 'minecraft/options.txt' file and returns data in 'key:value pairs,' making its purpose unmistakable.

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 offers no guidance on when this tool should be used versus alternatives like 'get_instance_setting' or 'set_option,' forcing the AI to rely solely on tool naming for decision-making.

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