get_blocking_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clarifies the semantic of 'blocking' (related to completion), but does not disclose whether the result is recursive, what item properties are returned, or any permissions/guarantees. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, focused sentence that states exactly what the tool does with no filler or redundancy. It is efficiently front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately conveys core behavior. It lacks detail on the shape of returned items or edge cases, but these are likely obvious from context. Slight gap due to no output schema.

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 description coverage is 100% (every parameter has a description), so baseline is 3. However, the parameter description 'item_id parameter' is purely tautological and adds no meaningful semantics beyond the schema field name.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the exact resource: items that block this item from being completed. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_item_relationships or get_active_items by focusing on blocking behavior.

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 purpose implies when to use it (when needing blockers), but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. It lacks comparative context against related sibling tools.

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