mc_say

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full load. It does disclose the key side effect that every player on the server sees the message, which is the most important behavioral fact for a broadcast tool. It says nothing about rate limits, cooldowns, or what happens on failure/disconnect, and truncation is only covered by the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the audience constraint attached inline. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and audience but omits operational context such as cooldowns, failure modes, or what a successful send returns. Adequate to call correctly, not 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents that it must be one line and is truncated to 220 characters. The description adds no format, encoding, or content restrictions beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific action (speak) on a specific surface (MC public chat) and clarifies the audience (all players in game can see it). That scope distinguishes it from command-like siblings such as mc_command, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative named. The parenthetical about all players seeing the message hints that this is a broadcast, but the agent must infer on its own that private/command channels live elsewhere.

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