aoe2_unit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it says nothing about error behavior for unknown IDs, rate limits, or response shape. It at least makes clear this is a read-only lookup, which prevents worse than a 1.

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 or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a trivially simple one-parameter lookup.

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 minimal single-param lookup with no output schema, the description is adequate but bare. It leaves unresolved how an agent obtains a valid unit ID and what the returned object contains, which a slightly longer sentence could have covered.

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?

There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Unit ID'), so the schema already documents it. The description adds no format or range detail beyond that, making the baseline 3 the correct call.

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 ('Age of Empires II unit') qualified by lookup key ('by ID'), which is enough to separate it from aoe2_units and aoe2_technologies. It stops short of the 5 tier because it never explicitly names the list sibling to contrast with.

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 guidance on when to prefer this over aoe2_units, nor any mention of what IDs are valid or where to get one. The only implicit signal is 'by ID' in the purpose text.

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