Inspect Room Object

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint to false, implying potential side effects, but the description portrays the tool as a simple examination without clarifying any behavioral traits. It fails to explain what happens during inspection (e.g., state changes, action consumption) or address the contradiction with readOnlyHint.

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 sentence with no wasted words, directly stating the tool's purpose. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise.

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 simple inspection tool, the description is minimal but functional. However, with no output schema, it provides no information about what 'greater detail' means (e.g., format, content) leaving the agent to guess. Some additional context on return value would improve completeness.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify acceptable synonyms for 'target' or session ID handling. Baseline 3 is appropriate due to full schema coverage.

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 'Examine one visible room object in greater detail' clearly identifies the action (examine), the resource (visible room object), and distinguishes from sibling tools like look_around which likely provide a broader view.

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 implicitly suggests usage when a player wants more detail on a specific object, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus sibling tools (e.g., look_around) nor provide exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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