minecraft_events

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

The phrase "after a cursor" discloses the key pagination behavior, and "Read" implies a non-destructive operation. However, with no annotations provided, the description does not clarify ordering, event retention, whether the cursor is advanced or consumed, or the shape of the returned event list.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and no filler. It sacrifices some behavioral detail, but as a concise structural choice it is appropriate.

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?

No output schema means the agent has no description of the returned events, and there is no mention of how to initialize or advance the cursor. For a paginated event reader, this leaves important call sequences undocumented.

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 description clarifies that cursor is a position after which events are returned, which is useful because schema_description_coverage is 0%. It does not explain limit beyond its schema range, but the parameter names plus min/max constraints carry some of that weight.

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?

States the verb "Read" and a specific resource: recent world and action events after a cursor. This clearly separates it from action-oriented siblings like minecraft_dig or minecraft_say, which perform operations rather than return event history.

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 the tool is used to retrieve a stream of world/action events, but it never says when to call it, how to obtain the initial cursor, or what alternative to use. With no similar read siblings, the differentiation is obvious, yet the usage context is left to inference.

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