unequip_item

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool clears the specified slot and which slots are valid, but does not mention behavior if the slot is already empty or any side effects. Still adequate for a simple, common operation.

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 sentences, each essential. Front-loaded with action verb 'Clear' and immediately gives examples. No wasted words.

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 one parameter and the presence of an output schema (not visible but noted), the description covers the core action and slot validity. It does not mention return values, but output schema may cover that. Slight gap in not explaining error cases, but overall sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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?

Only one parameter 'slot' with no schema description coverage. The description adds meaning by providing examples of valid slot names (e.g., 'Ring 2'), which helps more than a bare string type. Could be improved by listing all possible slots, but examples suffice.

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?

Clearly states it clears an equipment slot on the active build, with specific examples like 'Ring 2', 'Body Armour'. Distinguishes from sibling tools equip_item and equip_jewel by naming them as alternatives for filling slots.

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 tells when to use (to clear a slot) and mentions valid slots including weapon-swap and jewel sockets. Provides clear guidance on using equip_item/equip_jewel for filling, differentiating usage scenarios.

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