can_complete_now

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'presence-only' but does not explain what that means (e.g., does it ignore quality? quantity?). No information about whether it is read-only or requires specific game state.

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 very short (one sentence, 7 words), which is concise but at the expense of completeness. It front-loads the core concept but omits necessary details.

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?

Without an output schema, the description must clarify the return value, but it does not. The phrase 'finishable from items currently held' is ambiguous—does it return a list of finished bundles, a boolean, or a count? The term 'presence-only' is unexplained.

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 100%, so the schema already explains the 'save_path' parameter adequately. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 identifies a specific resource ('incomplete CC bundles') and a specific check ('finishable from items currently held'), making the purpose reasonably clear despite the cryptic 'CC' abbreviation. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'bundle_sourcing' by focusing on completion rather than sourcing.

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 (e.g., 'bundle_sourcing'), nor does it mention any prerequisites or limitations. The agent must infer context from similar tools.

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