jargon

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the key behavioral modes: passing a term defines it, omitting the term lists everything. This covers the core operational behavior. It doesn't detail return format or side effects, but the behavior is simple and sufficiently exposed.

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 tool's purpose, followed by usage context and examples. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundancy.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers its purpose, usage, and behavior. It explains both invocation modes and provides examples, making it complete for an AI agent to select and call correctly.

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 documents the single parameter with 100% coverage ('The slang term to define; omit to list all terms'). The description adds similar phrasing ('Pass a term to define it') but no additional semantic value 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 it's an EVE slang glossary, with a specific verb ('define') and resource ('slang glossary'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like lookup_item and system_intel by focusing on slang terminology, and provides concrete examples.

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 explicitly says 'Use whenever the player hits a word like...', giving clear context for when to invoke the tool. It doesn't mention when not to use or alternatives, but the guidance is direct and actionable.

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