Discover a standard or custom character model

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing the fallback strategy ('checks the normal hierarchy first, then performs a bounded Workspace model search') and the bounded nature of the search, which is genuinely useful operationally.

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 core guidance is front-loaded in the first two sentences, which is where the value sits. The trailing metadata block (phase, cost, idempotency, safety) partly duplicates the annotations, adding some redundancy without derailing readability.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by noting that resolved paths are returned and that failure routing points to tool-schema for exact fields. It covers the essentials for a read-only discovery call, though the exact shape of the returned candidates is not described.

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%, so limit, playerName, scanWorkspace, and threadContext are already documented. The description's signature line restates parameter names/types without adding semantic detail such as bounds or defaults that the schema lacks, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Find the active player's character') and precisely scopes the edge cases it handles: missing Humanoid/HumanoidRootPart or custom-named models. An agent can immediately distinguish it from get-local-player-info and generic instance lookups.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this after get-local-player-info reports a missing character' and tells the agent to consume the returned resolved paths rather than assuming the conventional path. The trigger condition and the sibling it follows are spelled out, so nothing is left to inference.

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