get_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that PvE and PvP fields are separate and should never be mixed, which is a critical behavioral trait. It also notes that PvP fields are only present when the move has them. This is valuable context beyond the schema.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the action and examples; the second adds the critical PvE/PvP separation warning. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter lookup tool, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, what the parameter accepts, and the important PvE/PvP distinction. It doesn't describe return format, but with no output schema and a simple lookup, the core usage is well covered. The warning about not mixing fields is particularly important for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: it explains the 'query' parameter accepts either a display name ('Psycho Cut') or an internal ID ('PSYCHO_CUT_FAST'), giving concrete examples. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema property.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Look up one move by name or internal id' with concrete examples. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_moves by specifying it retrieves a single move by exact identifier rather than searching.

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 when to use this tool: when you have a specific move name or ID and need its details. It doesn't explicitly say 'use search_moves when you don't know the exact ID,' but the contrast with search_moves is clear from the sibling context and the 'look up one move' phrasing.

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