create_character

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a character and returns starting stats, and it clarifies the role options. It does not mention potential side effects like saving, but for a creation tool it is sufficiently transparent.

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 relatively concise, using a table-like format for roles. It front-loads the main purpose and includes necessary details without excessive verbosity.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no nesting) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameters, roles, and return value adequately. It does not explain every detail but is complete enough for the context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides brief descriptions for 'name' and 'role' and enumerates the role options with explanations. This adds some meaning beyond the schema but does not deeply elaborate on parameter constraints or format.

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 'Create an Integration Hero and begin your quest' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings which involve combat, exploration, and other actions.

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 explains the roles and their purposes, guiding the user on which role to choose for different tasks. It implicitly indicates when to use this tool (starting a game) but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools.

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