roll_dice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It communicates a stateless operation that returns results, but it does not explicitly disclose nondeterminism, bounds on n_dice, or any edge-case behavior beyond what is obvious from rolling dice.

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 efficient sentence that conveys the action, parameter meaning, die type, and return behavior with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation semantics. The output schema covers return details, so the description need not restate them.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, so the tool description must clarify the meaning of n_dice. 'Roll n_dice 6-sided dice' clearly maps the sole parameter to the number of dice. It could also mention the default, but that is already present in the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: rolling n_dice six-sided dice and returning results. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling tool add_numbers, so an agent can select it correctly without ambiguity.

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 expected use is implied: use this tool when dice rolls are needed. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus add_numbers, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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