走到某个坐标（有真实走路动画，真人能看到）

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description goes well beyond by disclosing server-side speed limiting (9~12 m/s), the returned reason values (arrived, superseded), guest rate limiting (1 per 2s), and that new moves preempt prior move/follow commands. Strong, though it doesn't say what happens on timeout or failure reasons beyond 'arrived'.

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?

Purpose and the exclusivity constraint are front-loaded, and every sentence carries operational information (speed, reasons, rate limit, preemption). It is dense rather than bloated, though the rate-limit and interruption clauses could be tightened.

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 3-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite, the mutation semantics, the terminal return reasons, and the throttling/preemption behavior an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining where x/z values come from (a position obtained via world_observe) and that timeout is auto-estimated from distance, which ties the coordinates to a concrete workflow.

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 concrete verb+resource+scope: '让形象走到世界坐标 (x, z)'. It also declares exclusivity ('这是唯一的位移方式'), which immediately separates it from world_follow and any teleport-style sibling.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite workflow: call world_observe to get a target's position, then pass x/z. It also states when-not (no teleport, coordinates cannot be set directly) and names the interruption condition against follow/move commands, plus per-role rate limits.

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