Entity counts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. Beyond that, the description usefully discloses the return composition: totals, counts by type, items, villagers, named mobs, tamed pets, and busiest chunks with block entities and hoppers.

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 front-loaded with the summary scope and followed by a routing instruction. It is dense but every clause describes return content or usage, with little waste.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what the summary contains, and it does so in detail. It is nearly complete for a read-only summary tool, though it could say more about the types parameter and coordinate/radius interaction.

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 coverage is only 50%, and the description clarifies the radius mode by saying 'within radius of x, y, z' and the loaded/world scope. However, it does not explain the types filter or the world parameter naming, so it only partially compensates for schema gaps.

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 states a specific resource and scope: a compact entity summary for a world, either loaded entities or entities within a radius. It distinguishes the tool from list_entities by contrasting summary counts with one-by-one entity listing.

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?

It explicitly recommends calling this before list_entities, giving a clear sequencing rule and alternative. It does not spell out when not to use it or that radius requires x, y, and z together, which keeps it from a 5.

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