mage_hand_use

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: allowed actions, prohibited actions, weight limit (10 lbs), range (30 ft), and the non-adjudication for undefined uses. This covers all key behaviors.

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 dense sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys all necessary information in a compact form.

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 all aspects needed to adjudicate the cantrip: allowed uses, prohibitions, constraints, and the boundary for GM calls. No output schema exists, but the return behavior is implied.

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 low (33%), but the description adds meaning to all parameters: 'kind' uses are listed, and weight/distance limits are given. This compensates well for the schema gaps.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: adjudicate a proposed use of the Mage Hand cantrip. It lists granted uses, prohibitions, constraints, and the fallback for unlisted uses, making it specific and distinct from sibling tools.

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 indicates when to use the tool (for any Mage Hand use) and what it will return for unlisted uses ('cannot-adjudicate'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, though the sibling context makes it clear.

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