take_artifact

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

The description discloses that the tool is only functional in the artifact chamber, triggers the endgame, and requires narrating the packet exactly. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, which it fulfills well.

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?

Two short sentences with no fluff. The critical constraint and action are front-loaded, making the description immediately scannable and actionable.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is fully adequate. It covers purpose, precondition, and expected behavior completely.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the description is not required to add parameter details. It does provide context about what the tool acts on ('the packet'), which is helpful.

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 tool is an endgame trigger requiring the player to be in the artifact chamber and to narrate the packet content. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like attack or move.

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?

Explicitly states the prerequisite condition ('only works standing in the artifact chamber') and the context ('endgame trigger'). It does not explicitly name alternatives but implies this is the sole endgame action.

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