look_at

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

The description discloses the basic behavior but nothing else. It doesn't mention whether the look is instantaneous, persistent, or if there are any constraints. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, yet provides only surface-level transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose with zero wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool.

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 simple tool with three well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly defines the behavior. However, it lacks any note about return values or side effects relative to sibling tools, making it slightly incomplete.

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?

The input schema fully documents all three parameters with clear descriptions (e.g., 'Target X coordinate'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond pointing to 'specific world coordinates', so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('make the bot look at') on a specific resource ('specific world coordinates'). It is immediately distinct from sibling tools like teleport_to or fly_to, which involve movement.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does, without any context for choosing it over other control tools.

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