Follow a visible player in Minecraft by providing their name and optional distance. Keeps the agent moving toward that player continuously until the action is stopped.
Continuously follow a visible player until stopped.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| player | Yes | ||
| distance | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does reveal the action is continuous, requires a visible target, and persists until stopped. However, it doesn't state failure behavior if the target becomes invisible, how distance is applied, or side effects beyond movement.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the core verb and object, with no filler or repetition. Every word adds meaning.
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 continuous action with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits cancellation guidance, distance semantics, and visibility failure handling. It is minimally usable but leaves an agent guessing on important operational details.
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%, and the description does not explain the distance parameter at all. It only clarifies that 'player' is the visible player to follow, leaving the optional distance range (1-16) without behavioral meaning.
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 uses a specific verb ('follow'), names the resource ('a visible player'), and states it is continuous and runs until stopped. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like minecraft_goto (movement to a location) and minecraft_stop (cancellation).
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?
It implies the condition that the player must be visible and that a stop signal ends the action, but it never explicitly says when to use this over minecraft_goto or that minecraft_stop should be used to cancel. No alternatives or exclusions are named.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.