Get Pokémon options

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

With no annotations, the description itself only indicates a retrieval operation, which is non-destructive and safe. However, it does not disclose behaviors such as input normalizations (though schema mentions corrections are reported), default format handling, or any external dependencies, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 listing key outputs without wasted words. It uses consistent comma-separated items, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 moderate complexity and presence of an output schema, the description adequately lists return content and scopes to one Pokémon. However, it omits guidance on parameter interactions (e.g., default include behavior) and does not differentiate from siblings, making it slightly incomplete for full contextual navigation.

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 50%, with descriptions for 'pokemon' and 'format' but not for the two boolean flags. The description's mention of 'optional teammates/counters' hints at includeTeammates/includeCounters, but it does not explicitly map parameters, so semantics for the booleans remain partially inferred.

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 tool retrieves 'common sets, moves, items, abilities, spreads, and optional teammates/counters' for a single Pokémon, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like calculate_stats or get_speed_tiers, which focus on calculations and speed tiers.

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 when teambuilding needs suggested sets/options for a Pokémon, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it. For example, it does not mention using calculate_stats for damage calculations instead.

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