get_player_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It lists what information is returned (position, inventory, stats, crafting queue) but does not disclose read-only nature, potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not fully transparent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key categories. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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 must inform expected return values. It lists four major categories (position, inventory, stats, crafting queue), which is fairly complete for a player info tool. Minor omission: does not mention if additional details like health or energy are included, but 'detailed information' covers this adequately.

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% for the single parameter 'player' with description 'Player name'. The description adds that it is for a 'specific player' but does not provide additional semantic details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already handles the parameter documentation.

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 retrieves 'detailed information about a specific player' and lists specific categories (position, inventory, stats, crafting queue). This is a specific verb+resource combination that effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_players' (list all) and 'get_player_surroundings' (environment).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for a single player's details, and the presence of sibling tools like 'get_players' allows inference, but no clear when-not or alternative naming provided.

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