Find unique items

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description adds real value beyond that: it discloses returned fields (full current mods, level requirement, drop locations), explains the bossDrop field's cost implication, and clarifies it returns no prices. It stops short of any pagination or result-count behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Purpose, guidance, and the alternative-tool rule are front-loaded in the first sentences. The trailing slot enumeration is bulky but functional as an enum substitute; it earns its place, though the list does lengthen the entry notably.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so by naming the fields returned and stating the absence of prices. The main gap is unaddressed 'avoid'/'limit' parameters, but the core contract for calling this tool correctly is present.

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 only 40% (terms and maxRequiredLevel documented), so the description must compensate. It does enrich slots by enumerating valid slot values (schema has no enums) and clarifies terms semantics, but 'avoid' and 'limit' are left entirely undocumented in both places.

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 verb (find) and resource (unique items) and scopes it to 'mods match what the build scales', which is far more than restating the name. It also explicitly separates itself from the pricing siblings ('No prices here'), so an agent can tell it apart from item_prices and trade_links.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule ('For a price, use trade_links') plus a decision heuristic for budget builds (prefer common uniques, treat bossDrop: true as expensive). It names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it, leaving little to inference.

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