import-item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states that the tool copies from a compendium pack, preserving artwork and system data. It notes that it should not be used with SRD packs (only premium books). It explains the workflow and optional modifications. While it doesn't mention rate limits or authentication, for a copy operation the behavioral traits are well-covered.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then provides structured workflow and optional tweaks. It is somewhat verbose but every sentence adds value. It uses clear sections (workflow, optional on-copy tweaks) and distinguishes from sibling tools effectively.

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 has 11 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the purpose, usage guidelines, parameter details, workflow, and references sibling tools like search-compendium and add-item. It also explains the lootCopy behavior and the constraint to use premium books only. No gaps are evident.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by providing context: e.g., the lootCopy parameter's default for magic items, the container parameter requiring an existing container, and the actorIdentifier parameter for targeting actors or world. The workflow section clarifies how parameters like name are used for renaming custom items.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: COPY an existing item from a compendium pack onto an actor or world sidebar, preserving artwork and system data. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'add-item' by noting that import-item is preferred for real gear and copying brings correct stats and graphics, while add-item is for genuine homebrew with no compendium base.

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 a clear workflow: (1) find item with search-compendium, (2) import-item with packId and itemId, (3) for custom items, copy the closest base then refine with update-actor-item etc. It explicitly states when to prefer this tool over add-item and when to use add-item instead. It also details optional on-copy tweaks and explains the lootCopy parameter's default behavior.

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