Get an exact FiveM native

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'unknown identifiers return not_found' and the requirement to specify the API set, which are not covered by annotations. No contradiction.

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 core action, and every word contributes. It is concise without being under-specified.

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?

For a tool with an output schema, the description adequately explains the lookup purpose, required disambiguation (apiSet), and error behavior (not_found). It could go deeper on case sensitivity or exact matching rules, but the essentials are covered.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by clarifying 'identifier' as a native name or hash and 'apiSet' as the execution API set. However, it does not explicitly address the 'kind' parameter, though the name/hash enum is implied. Some meaning is added, but not fully.

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 uses the specific verb 'Look up' and names the resource ('exact native name or hash') and source ('official sources'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'search_fivem_docs' by emphasizing exact lookup rather than search.

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 usage for exact native lookup and notes a requirement (must provide execution API set), but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like search_fivem_docs, nor does it state any exclusions.

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