Search hideout crafts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It establishes a read/search tone with 'find' and adds a concrete behavior: item/station IDs in results are resolved to names. It does not disclose behavior when no filters are provided, pagination behavior, or result structure, but for a non-destructive search tool the core risk is low.

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 compact sentences that front-load the search purpose and add one relevant output detail. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or redundancy with the schema.

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 description plus schema cover the input parameters and core search intent well. However, there is no output schemahol and the description does not describe what fields a craft recipe result contains or what happens when both itemId and station are omitted. That leaves some uncertainty about expected results.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description contributes a small clarification that itemId/station jointly define what is 'involved' and that IDs are resolved in output, but it adds no material meaning beyond the schema for lang, limit, or gameMode.

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 a specific verb and resource ('find hideout craft recipes') and clearly defines the filtering dimensions: item and/or hideout station. 'Hideout craft' differentiates it from sibling tools like search_barters and search_items, even without naming them. The operation is unambiguous.

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 intended usage is implied: use this tool when looking for hideout craft recipes that involve a particular item or station. However, it never explicitly states when not to use it or points to alternatives such as search_barters or get_hideout_station, so an agent may not route perfectly between related tools.

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