update-item

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

Discloses authorization requirement (GM-only) and a special rename behavior for dnd5e. With no annotations, the description partially carries the behavioral burden but does not mention side effects, destructiveness, or what happens on error.

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?

Two sentences with no waste: purpose, constraint, and a critical special case all front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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?

Covers key aspects (purpose, authorization, special case) but lacks information about return values (no output schema) and does not explain what 'world-level' means in contrast to actor-owned items. For a mutation tool with no annotations, some gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful extra context beyond the schema: it explains the rename behavior for unidentified dnd5e items, which is not in the schema. The description also reiterates the 'world-level' scope, reinforcing the parameter's context.

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?

Clearly states verb (update) and resource (world-level Items by id), lists changable fields (name, img, system data, folder), and specifies GM-only. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create-item and update-actor-item by explicitly saying 'world-level'.

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?

Explicitly states GM-only constraint and provides specific guidance for renaming unidentified dnd5e items. However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like update-actor-item, though the world-level scope is implied.

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