begin_adventure

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions receiving opening context and choices but does not say whether beginning a new adventure creates or overwrites a session, or what happens if an existing adventure_session_id is supplied. This is a material gap for a state-changing, session-based tool.

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, tight sentence with no filler. The core action and expected outcome are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 has one optional parameter whose semantics are unexplained, and the absence of annotations leaves side effects and prerequisites unclear. While an output schema exists, the description alone does not tell an agent whether to start fresh, carry over a session, or expect destructive behavior.

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 0% and the description never mentions adventure_session_id. The parameter name hints at session identity, but the description does not clarify whether null starts a fresh adventure or an ID resumes/restarts one, leaving the sole parameter ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb ('Begin') with a clear resource ('a new adventure') and states the expected output ('opening context and choices'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling action tools like choose_action, examine, and look_around.

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 implies that this tool is the entry point before the action-oriented sibling tools, but it never explicitly states when to use it or how to choose between passing null and an adventure_session_id. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so usage guidance relies on inference.

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