start_combat

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'start a fight' without disclosing side effects (e.g., state changes, combat initialization), required permissions, or constraints like enemy validity. Minimal behavioral disclosure for a state-changing 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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks any structure or additional informative content. It could be expanded with key details without losing 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 the tool initiates combat with two parameters and no behavioral context, the description fails to explain the full context: that this may transition the game state, that subsequent actions like resolve_combat_round are expected, or what the output schema provides. Incomplete for a combat initiator.

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 0% (no descriptions in input schema), and the tool description adds no meaning to the parameters 'enemies' and 'flee_allowed'. The agent cannot infer what values are expected for enemies (e.g., IDs, objects) or the role of flee_allowed.

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 starts a fight against one or more living enemies, specifying verb (start), resource (combat), and scope (one or more living enemies). It inherently distinguishes from sibling tools like end_combat, flee_combat, or resolve_combat_round.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., character must be created), workflows (e.g., call before resolve_combat_round), or when not to use it (e.g., already in combat).

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