lookup_enhancement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only describes the return fields, not match behavior (exact vs partial), handling of missing results, or default edition. It does not disclose any side effects or limitations beyond being a lookup.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the purpose and return content. No filler words; every word earns its place.

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's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose and return value. However, it omits behavioral details like default edition and matching logic, and there is no output schema. For a lookup with 4 parameters, a bit more context on filtering behavior would be useful.

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?

The schema covers all 4 parameters at 100%, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics. It only restates 'by name' which matches the required parameter, but does not elaborate on optional filters.

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 'Look up' with a specific resource 'enhancement' and clearly states the return fields (points cost, detachment, and effect). This distinguishes it from sibling lookup tools for stratagems, units, and other resources.

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 does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state exclusions. While the resource type is clear, there is no guidance such as 'use for enhancements; for stratagems use lookup_stratagem'. Usage is only implied by the resource name.

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