get_quest_requirements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating that the tool does not evaluate player progress, which is a key behavioral trait for an AI agent to understand.

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 sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 (one parameter, no enums, comprehensive annotations, and an output schema), the description is fully sufficient. It covers purpose, key behavioral constraint, and is complete.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'quest' (described as 'Exact Wiki quest name'). The tool description adds no additional parameter details, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 the verb 'Get', the specific resource 'Old School RuneScape Wiki quest requirements', and adds a key qualifier 'without evaluating any player's progress'. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like get_wiki_page or search_wiki.

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 includes a usage guideline: 'without evaluating any player's progress', which explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool vs. alternatives like personalized quest requirement tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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