minecraft_inventory

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 discloses that the tool lists inventory contents, which implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't state whether this requires a connection, whether it reflects the player's current state, or any side effects. The description is minimal and doesn't add behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and the key output fields. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is mostly complete. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it doesn't clarify whether the tool requires an active connection or what the return format looks like. Given the sibling set includes minecraft_connect and minecraft_disconnect, a note about prerequisites would improve completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description adds meaning by specifying what the output contains (item names, counts, slots), which is useful for an agent deciding whether to call it. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools 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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('inventory'), and specifies the output fields (item names, counts, slots). It is clear and distinguishes itself from siblings like minecraft_equip or minecraft_collect, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 usage: call this to inspect the inventory. It doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, but the context of sibling tools (e.g., minecraft_equip, minecraft_collect) makes the purpose reasonably clear. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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