rba_teleport_to_position

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions that the previous position is remembered, which is an important behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose coordinate space, effect on current state, or any safety/reversibility details beyond the remembered position.

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?

A single sentence that is compact and front-loaded with the primary action. It wastes no words and delivers the core purpose immediately.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, but the description only covers the basic coordinate teleport concept. Important details about target selection, timeout, yaw, and return behavior are absent, so the context is incomplete for reliable invocation.

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, but it only clarifies that x/y/z are coordinates. It adds no meaning for target, timeoutMs, or yawDegrees, leaving most of the parameter semantics unexplained.

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 gives a specific verb ('Teleport'), a precise resource ('the local character'), and a mode ('exact coordinates'), plus the side-effect of remembering the previous position. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rba_teleport_to_part or rba_teleport_to_place.

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 phrase 'exact coordinates' implies this tool is for coordinate-based teleportation, providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly compare against sibling teleport tools or state when to prefer this over rba_teleport_to_part or rba_teleport_to_place.

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