move-up-by-pillaring

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavior disclosure. It explains the core jump-and-place behavior but fails to mention important traits like block consumption from inventory, the optional mining behavior (allowMiningOf), or potential risks. This is a significant gap for a movement tool.

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 two sentences long and perfectly concise. The first sentence describes the core function, and the second adds a use-case hint. 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?

The tool has a nested object parameter (allowMiningOf) and no annotations or output schema. The description is too short to cover important operational details such as how mining is triggered, material requirements, or limits. This makes it insufficient for a tool with this complexity.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (height and allowMiningOf), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning about how these parameters are used, sticking to the schema baseline.

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: 'Build a pillar by jumping and placing blocks below.' This specifies the verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'move-horizontally-and-up-using-steps', but the mechanism is unique enough to be understood.

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 says 'Good for trying to go way up,' which provides a clear context for usage. However, it doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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