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

Beyond the annotations, the description explains the successful outcome (a stamp and treasure-hunter badge) and privacy treatment of the visitor name. It does not describe failure behavior or how validation errors are returned.

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 front-loaded with the action and requirements, then rewards and privacy. Every sentence contributes useful information with no wasted wording.

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?

It covers the core submission rules, reward, and privacy needed to call the tool correctly. It leaves minor gaps around how to obtain today's theme and what the response looks like on failure.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds essential semantic constraints not in the schema: tokens must be from at least 3 different collections and found with a query including today's theme. It also clarifies that visitor_name is public and CC0.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: hand in today's treasure hunt. It clearly states the submission criteria and distinguishes this write action from retrieval siblings like todays_hunt, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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 provides clear prerequisites: ficha_caza tokens from at least 3 results across 3 different collections, found with a query including today's theme. It does not explicitly tell the agent to call todays_hunt first or state when not to submit.

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