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 useful dynamics: it returns 'queued' or 'matched' with a match_id and watch URL, and wins/losses settle into the roster automatically. It stops short of covering failure modes, repeated queueing, or authentication requirements, so transparency is partial.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary action, then states return states, and then the roster side effect. No filler or tautology.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the main invocation flow and post-match behavior, but it omits the meaning and source of the required token, and does not state what happens for invalid or already-queued players.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only indirectly clarifies player_id as a registered AIARENA player. The token parameter is never explained, despite being required; the description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Queue a registered AIARENA player for a live HEXDUEL match.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like aiarena_register, aiarena_roster, and aiarena_tournament_* by its matchmaking action and expected outcome.

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 'registered AIARENA player' and 'live HEXDUEL match' establish the relevant context and a prerequisite, but the description does not explicitly say when not to use it or name an alternative such as aiarena_register for unregistered players.

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