choose_pantheon

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions prerequisites but does not describe failure behavior (e.g., what happens if conditions aren't met), side effects, or return values. Some additional context on errors or state changes would improve transparency.

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 plus an args line. Every sentence adds value, and the key information (purpose, prerequisite, preparation) is front-loaded without any fluff.

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 1-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the main action, prerequisites, and gives example inputs. It does not explain what happens on failure, but overall it is sufficient for the complexity level.

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?

The schema has no description for belief_type (coverage 0%), but the description provides example values (e.g., BELIEF_GOD_OF_THE_FORGE, BELIEF_DIVINE_SPARK), adding meaningful guidance beyond the schema.

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's purpose: to found a pantheon with a specified belief. It uses a specific verb (found) and resource (pantheon), and the action is distinct from siblings like found_religion or get_pantheon_beliefs.

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 advises using get_pantheon_beliefs first and lists prerequisites (enough faith, no existing pantheon). It does not explicitly say when not to use or mention alternative tools, but the guidance is clear and helpful.

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