lookup_api

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the tool's scope (types of API objects and patch-specificity) but does not disclose return format or error behavior. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.

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, well-structured sentence with no filler. It leads with the verb and covers the essential scope. Every word contributes to understanding.

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?

The tool has a clear purpose, rich annotations, and a fully described schema. Although there is no output schema, the description implies the return of a definition from a specific patch. Some details about output structure are missing, but the description is adequate given the context. Score 4.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description references 'exact' (matching the name parameter) and 'one retail patch' (matching version) but adds no new parameter details. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 'Look up' and clearly specifies the resource: 'exact WoW API function, method, event, enum, structure, widget, or system in one retail patch.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_api (which implies fuzzy search) and diff/compare by emphasizing 'exact' and 'one retail patch.'

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 implicitly communicates when to use it (for exact lookups in a specific patch), but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It provides clear context for its intended use case, so it earns a 4 rather than a 3.

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