ammo_advisor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses meaningful behavior by noting it includes concrete ammo names per weapon system and covers both offense and tanking. This goes beyond a simple statement of purpose.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no redundant filler. Every word contributes to the description.

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 tool has only one parameter and a simple advisory purpose. The description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns, so an agent can route requests correctly without needing an output schema.

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 already provides a clear description of the 'target' parameter, covering 100% of the semantics. The description adds extra examples of factions but does not introduce new meaning beyond the schema.

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's purpose: advising on which damage types to shoot and tank against specific targets. It lists the supported factions and player tank types, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: whenever damage types are needed for NPC pirate factions or shield/armor-tanked players. However, it does not state any when-not conditions or alternative tool recommendations.

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