activate-item

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose effects like item consumption, cooldowns, failure conditions, or what happens after use. The examples only illustrate the action, not behavioral traits.

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, well-crafted sentence with concrete examples. It is highly concise, front-loaded, and 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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description provides adequate purpose but lacks behavioral details like return values or failure modes. It is sufficient for a simple action but could be slightly more complete.

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% with a clear description for the offhand parameter. The tool description adds no extra parameter context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (use) and the resource (currently held item), with specific examples (shoot bow, raise shield, throw snowball, drink potion) that distinguish it from sibling tools like equip-item or block-activate.

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 examples imply when to use the tool (e.g., when wanting to shoot or raise shield), but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. For a tool with many siblings, this is minimal but acceptable.

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