get_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently states the action is returning data and lists the fields included. It implies read-only behavior by saying 'Return all equipped items.' While it doesn't explicitly confirm no side effects, the description is sufficient for a simple retrieval operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and each sentence adds value. No unnecessary words, making it highly concise for the information provided.

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 has zero parameters and an output schema exists, the description is complete. It lists the return fields even though the output schema likely defines them, so the description adds context about the tool's purpose without needing further detail.

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?

There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. Per rules, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4, and the description correctly adds no extra parameter information because none is needed.

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 returns all equipped items with their mods, listing the specific fields (slot, rarity, name, base type, item level, tooltip mod lines). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_passives, get_skills, etc., which return different data.

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 use when the agent needs details about equipped items in the currently loaded build. There is no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use, but it's a simple read with no parameters, making usage straightforward. A 4 is appropriate given clarity without explicit alternative references.

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