examine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether examining is read-only, whether it changes game state, what happens when the item is absent, or whether scene vs. inventory items behave differently.

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 with no filler, and the verb-object structure front-loads the core purpose. 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?

The description covers the core purpose and item scope well, and an output schema exists to handle return-value documentation. However, missing parameter explanation and absent usage guidance leave meaningful gaps, particularly around the required adventure_session_id.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that item_name can refer to either an inventory item or a current scene item, but it says nothing about adventure_session_id, expected formats, or how the two parameters relate.

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 pairs the verb "Examine" with specific resource types: "an inventory item or an item present in the current scene." This clearly distinguishes the tool from scene-level look_around and mutating actions like take_item, drop_item, or use.

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 examine should be used when an agent wants details about a specific item, but it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings like look_around or use. The boundary is inferable from sibling names, but the description does not state it directly.

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