minecraft_describe_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Return' weakly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose permissions, side effects, stability guarantees, or error behavior for invalid tool names.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to the ambiguity noted in other dimensions.

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 values need not be described. However, for a one-parameter meta tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is too thin: it lacks usage routing, parameter detail, and behavioral context an agent needs to invoke 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% for the single required 'name' parameter. The description adds only that it refers to the selected MCP tool, without clarifying format, valid values, or whether it must match a sibling tool name exactly.

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 states a verb (Return) and a resource (guidance metadata) scoped to a selected MCP tool, so the broad purpose is identifiable. However, 'stable guidance metadata' is vague and the description does not distinguish this tool from sibling help/describe tools such as minecraft_help or help_command.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'for the selected MCP tool' implies that a tool name must be supplied, but it does not say when an agent should call this instead of other help or metadata tools.

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