Draw from a roll table

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

The description discloses the key side effects: draw mode marks entries on tables without replacement so they do not come again, while roll mode never marks anything. It also states that nothing goes to chat unless chat is set. This goes well beyond the generic annotations (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint false) and tells an agent exactly how state may change.

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?

Three sentences, with the purpose front-loaded first and mode/chat behavior following directly. There is no filler or repeated information beyond necessary clarification.

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 definition covers purpose, mode behavior, chat behavior, and side effects, and the schema fully documents all parameters. It lacks only a description of the return-value shape and edge cases like an exhausted table, which is minor given the tool's low complexity and the absence of an output schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates mode behavior and the chat default that the schema already documents, adding no genuinely new parameter-level meaning beyond what an agent would already see in the input schema.

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 and resource: 'Roll on a roll table and return the entries.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get-roll-table or reset-roll-table by focusing on drawing and returning results, while the mode detail adds operational scope.

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 gives clear context for choosing mode 'draw' vs 'roll' and explains when chat output occurs. However, it never names alternatives such as get-roll-table, reset-roll-table, or roll-dice, nor states when not to use this tool, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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