horizon_torn_getTornItems

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the bare action. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, caching, or what 'information' is returned. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks substance. It does not earn its place because it provides minimal value; it is under-specified for a tool with five parameters and many siblings.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain the return structure, how to use parameters effectively, or when this tool is appropriate. The lack of output schema makes description even more critical, but it fails to compensate.

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?

All five parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about how parameters affect the output, such as how 'cat' filters categories or how 'sort' changes order.

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 'Get information about items' is clear in that it retrieves item data, but it is vague and does not distinguish from sibling tools like horizon_torn_getTornItemsSpecific or horizon_torn_getTornItemDetails. It lacks specificity about what 'items' refers to (e.g., all items in the game database).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling tools for items (e.g., horizon_torn_getTornItemsSpecific, horizon_torn_getTornItemDetails), but the description does not explain the context or criteria for selection.

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