Get healing

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds useful context that results are bounded and that playerID is interpreted as the WCL sourceID, but it does not explain truncation, defaults, or response behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and no filler. Each sentence earns its place, though the overall definition could be more informative.

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 an 11-parameter tool with no output schema and many similar siblings, this description is too thin. It omits return shape, when to prefer this over get_fight_healing, and the practical effect of the bounding parameters, leaving an agent to guess important call behavior.

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 schema description coverage at 64%, the description adds some meaning through 'bounded' (relating to maxEntries/maxPayloadBytes) and by clarifying playerID as the WCL sourceID. Still, several parameters such as abilityID and translate remain unexplained in both schema and description.

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 returns healing evidence and highlights the key playerID-to-sourceID mapping, so an agent knows the basic resource. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling get_fight_healing, leaving some ambiguity about scope.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_fight_healing, get_events, or other healing-related tools. The word 'bounded' faintly implies limited results, but there is no explicit context or alternative routing.

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