Get dispels

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It contributes 'bounded' results and clarifies that playerID maps to the WCL sourceID, both useful; however, it does not describe return shape, pagination, or other runtime behaviors.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core action. Two short sentences contain no filler, though the term 'bounded' is compressed and could be expanded slightly for clarity.

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?

For a tool with 11 parameters and no output schema, a one-line description is insufficient. It fails to mention what the dispel evidence contains, the filtering model, or what 'bounded' means practically, leaving an agent to guess about behavior and return values.

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?

With 64% schema coverage, the schema handles most parameters, and the description adds a meaningful refinement by specifying that playerID is applied as the WCL sourceID, extending the schema's 'source/target filter' note. It gives only a weak hint about the undocumented bound-related parameters, leaving abilityID, translate, maxEntries, and maxPayloadBytes without added semantic explanation.

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 identifies the tool's action and resource: 'Get bounded dispel evidence' clearly indicates a read operation for dispel-related data. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_interrupts or get_casts by the dispel resource, though it does not explicitly compare itself to alternatives.

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 offers no guidance on when to choose get_dispels over sibling tools or when not to use it. It states a parameter behavior ('playerID is correctly applied as WCL sourceID') but no usage context, exclusions, or alternatives.

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