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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive hints. The description adds valuable context by noting it is 'Keyless, live' and by listing the exact data points returned, enriching understanding beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with 'One-call summary,' and every word serves a purpose. It lists the included elements compactly without verbosity, making it an excellent example of concise writing.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema) and the description clearly lists the data it provides. It doesn't explicitly describe the return format or any caveats, but for a summary tool, the information given is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call it. Slightly more detail on response structure would make it complete.

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 description covers 100% of the platform parameter, specifying allowed values and default. The tool description adds no further semantic meaning about the parameter, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it is a 'One-call summary' of Warframe's live worldstate and enumerates the specific components (Cetus cycle, Cambion Drift, Orb Vallis, Sortie, Baro, Void Fissure count). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_fissures and get_invasions that focus on narrower data.

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 phrase 'One-call summary' clearly implies using this tool to get a broad overview of worldstate data in a single request, which helps select it over more specialized tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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