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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description usefully adds that the action is paid and instant. It does not disclose the cost, whether funds must be available, or prerequisites such as already having a profession or being at the university.

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 short sentence with the location prefix front-loaded and no wasted wording. It is perhaps too terse, but nothing is redundant.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the definition is structurally simple, but the agent still lacks key operational context: the price, failure conditions, and prerequisites for calling it. The description is adequate but leaves real gaps for a paid mutation.

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 no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for 0 params applies. Nothing in the description contradicts the empty 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 names a specific verb and effect ('сразу поднять силу профессии до максимума') plus the location ('Университет') and cost nature ('платно'). It is clearly distinct from siblings like game_university_enroll or game_university_pass, though it does not explicitly say so.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when you want to max out a profession's strength instantly at the university. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance, e.g., no comparison with normal leveling or game_university.

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