lookup_detachment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as a read-only lookup returning specific data, which implies safety. However, it does not disclose behavior on missing names or any potential side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey the purpose and return data without unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the action and results.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains return values. The tool is complete for its lookup purpose, and sibling tools cover related queries, so no gaps are apparent.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema. It repeats the lookup functionality but does not provide additional semantics for the parameters like format or usage constraints.

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 action ('Look up a Warhammer 40,000 detachment by name') and specifies the returned data ('detachment ability, available enhancements, and associated stratagems'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like lookup_enhancement and lookup_stratagem.

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 detachments by name, and the sibling tools cover related entities, making the context clear. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, though the context signals provide differentiation.

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