rest_bot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the key tradeoff: energy is restored at a small hunger cost, which changes agent strategy (don't spam rest). It omits cooldowns, time duration, or whether the action is reversible, but the core side effect is surfaced.

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?

Two compact sentences: purpose and effects first, trigger condition second. No filler, nothing to trim.

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 no-param state-changing action with no annotations or output schema, the description covers what it does, its side effect, and when to call it. Only the result format / post-rest state is unstated, which is minor.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the description correctly spends no words on inputs and none are needed.

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+resource ('Let Pixel rest/recharge') and immediately names the concrete effects (restores energy, small hunger cost). It clearly contrasts with feed_bot/give_treat by being about energy rather than hunger, though it does not explicitly call out the sibling distinction.

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?

'Use when the bot is tired' gives an unambiguous activation condition. It stops short of naming when NOT to use it or pointing to alternatives (e.g., get_bot_status to check energy first), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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