get_cached_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It does not disclose what happens if the block is not cached, whether it returns null/stale data, or any cache-specific behavior (TTL, invalidation). 'Cached' hints at persistence but nothing more.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Appropriately sized, though it is arguably too terse for the information it needs to convey.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the tool takes only 3 required primitives. However, with no annotations and no parameter documentation, the definition leaves key operational questions (cache miss behavior, coordinate frame) unanswered for an agent to call it confidently.

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 description coverage is 0% – x, y, z are only typed as integers with no explanation. The description confirms coordinates but doesn't add meaning (e.g., world/relative coordinates, valid ranges). With low coverage the description should compensate and does not.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (cached block) with a location qualifier (at coordinates). It's clear what it does, but offers no differentiation from siblings like cache_block or clear_cache, and the value of a 'cached block' versus a live lookup isn't explained.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like cache_block or whether this requires the block to be cached first. An agent cannot tell from the description when this tool is preferable to other block/position queries.

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