set_barrier

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral trait ('kills if pressure plate not activated'), which is valuable context beyond basic parameters. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or response format, leaving gaps for a mutation tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a crucial behavioral note. There's no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete: it states the action and a key consequence. However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or return values, which are important given the tool's potential destructive nature ('kills').

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 documents the two parameters (x and y coordinates). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as coordinate ranges or units, but meets the baseline since the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 states the action ('Set barrier position') and resource ('barrier'), making the purpose specific. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'remove_barrier' or 'set_pressure_plate', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 like 'remove_barrier' or 'set_pressure_plate', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for usage. The mention of 'kills if pressure plate not activated' hints at a consequence but doesn't frame it as usage guidance.

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