Look up a Minecraft class across eras

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool always returns top approximate matches, even on non-exact queries, and covers two version eras. This is good transparency 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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Each sentence serves a purpose: first states the function with examples, second clarifies approximate matching. Excellent conciseness.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return format (fully-qualified names and notes). It covers the main behavioral aspects. Could mention the output format explicitly (e.g., JSON), but completeness is high for a simple lookup tool.

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% with one parameter described as 'Concept name or partial class name'. The description adds value by explaining the output structure (fully-qualified names in two versions) and approximate matching behavior, going beyond the schema.

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 returns fully-qualified class names across two Minecraft versions (1.8.9 and 1.21+), with examples like 'Block', 'TileEntity', etc. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mc_lookup_field by focusing on class lookups across eras.

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 explains when to use it (given a class concept or partial name) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. However, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer typical usage.

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