get_pokemon

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals the read-only nature via 'Fetch' and specifies return content (summary stats, typing, measurements), but does not mention error handling, invalid identifiers, or any rate limits, leaving partial transparency.

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 concise and well-structured with a one-sentence purpose followed by Args and Returns sections. Every line earns its place, with no redundant text.

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 tool is simple, has an output schema, and the description covers the parameter and return overview. However, it lacks usage guidance and error behavior, which slightly reduces completeness for a tool with many siblings.

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 no description for name_or_dex (0% coverage), but the description explicitly explains it as 'Pokemon name or national dex number,' fully compensating for the missing schema detail and adding clear meaning.

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 'Fetch a Pokemon summary' with a specific verb and resource, and the scope is defined as summary stats, typing, and measurements. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_moves and get_sprites, which fetch specific data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_moves or get_sprites. It does not state exclusions or prerequisites beyond the identifier, leaving the agent to infer usage from the summary nature.

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