wallet

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

Without annotations, the description discloses how it works (reads 1.6 mail flags + legacy booleans) and confirms correctness across save versions. This provides good behavioral context beyond just naming the output.

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?

Two sentences covering purpose and technical nuance. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 retrieval tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It specifies type of items and version handling; could optionally list more items but not necessary.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add further parameter details; it only states the purpose. No added value or contradiction.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving owned special keys/items (Rusty Key, Skull Key, Club Card, etc.), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'inventory' or 'chests'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., inventory). The description only mentions version compatibility, not context or exclusions.

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