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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose key operational traits: free, no authentication required, and static per season. It does not discuss caching or whether the rubric can change mid-season, but the essential access profile is stated.

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, front-loaded with the core payload description and followed by the action recommendation. Minor redundancy in 'complete, exact' but no wasted sentences.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description fully specifies what will be returned (item/structure values in the wealth formula, the grading rubric) and its access characteristics, so an agent needs nothing more before calling it.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless, whole-rubric read rather than a queryable lookup.

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 names a specific resource (the scoring rubric / wealth formula and the Daishi Fitness Index benchmark, rubric 2.2) and states exactly what it contains. It is unmistakably distinct from every sibling, all of which are in-world actions like build, attack, or gather.

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?

It gives explicit timing guidance: 'Read this once before choosing a strategy; playing rationally requires knowing the payoff function.' That tells the agent when this tool matters, though it does not name any alternative tool or exclusion condition.

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