d2r_lookup_item_base

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

With no annotations, the description must detail behavior. It mentions substring matching and return fields (dimensions, requirements, sockets), which is helpful. However, it lacks clarity on case sensitivity, exact vs substring behavior for codes, and what happens when no match is found. These are gaps for a lookup 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 concise and well-structured, starting with the purpose, then search method, return info, and args section. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the core aspects: what it looks up, how to query, and what it returns. It could mention error handling or edge cases, but it's largely complete for agent use.

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?

The input schema only has a 'Query' title with 0% coverage, so the description compensates by explaining the parameter format: '3-character item code (e.g. 'hax') or item name' and gives an example. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it could clarify that codes expect exact match.

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: 'Look up a D2R base item by 3-char code or name.' This specific verb-resource combination distinguishes it from sibling lookup tools that target different entities like runewords, skills, or uniques.

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?

While the description implies usage for base items (by naming them), it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. For example, it doesn't say 'Use this for base items, use d2r_lookup_runeword for runewords.' The context from sibling names helps but is not explicit.

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