adventure_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool returns 'the complete entry with description merged in,' which is meaningful information about the response structure. It does not cover failure behavior on no match, but for a lookup tool this is a reasonable level of transparency.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The central behavior is front-loaded, followed by the return characteristics and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 lookup tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It states the return payload ('complete entry with description merged in') and provides routing guidance. It does not describe not-found behavior, but the absence is minor because the tool is straightforward and the schema handles parameter details.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the phrase 'exact name,' which reinforces the required parameter's meaning, but it does not add meaning to source or ruleset beyond what the schema already states.

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 and resource: 'Get a specific D&D 5e published adventure by exact name.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling adventure_search by explicitly saying it should be preferred when an exact name is known, leaving no ambiguity about its role.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: 'Prefer this over adventure_search when you have an exact name.' This tells the agent when to use this tool versus a clear alternative. It also implies that adventure_search is the fallback when an exact name is not available.

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