lookup_mod

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists what information is returned but does not mention potential quirks such as exact-name matching, behavior for unknown mods, case sensitivity, or the output format. This is an incomplete disclosure for a lookup tool.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, followed by a colon and a list of return fields. Every word adds value and there is no redundancy or 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 single-parameter lookup tool, the description covers the purpose and lists the returned data fields. However, there is no output schema and the description does not specify whether the return is a single object or an array, nor how errors are handled. This is a minor gap for a tool of this complexity.

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 input schema for the single 'names' parameter already provides a description and example. The tool description adds minimal value beyond restating that the lookup is 'by name' and that multiple mods are allowed. With 100% schema description coverage, the description does not add significant new parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Look up') and identifies the resource ('mods') and the fields returned ('stats progression, polarity, drain, rarity, and drop locations'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling lookups for warframes, weapons, and items, and from drop-based searches.

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 implies use for retrieving mod details by name, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name any alternative sibling tools. There is no explicit 'use X instead' guidance, so the usage context is clear only by inference.

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