player_assistant

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

No annotations exist to indicate read-only or destructive nature. The description only lists functions but fails to disclose behavior like how the intent parameter routes operations, or any limitations or side effects. The tool is described as an 'aggregation entry' which is vague.

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 short, using a single sentence to convey the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource. However, it could be more structured to list sub-functions clearly.

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?

Given that the tool has three parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient to fully understand how to invoke it correctly. It omits critical details like the role of the intent parameter and how to perform each specific action.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the purpose or usage of the three parameters (intent, name_prefix, player_name). There is no mapping from the listed functions to specific parameters, leaving the agent without essential semantic information.

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 the tool is for player/account operations, listing three specific actions (search, fuzzy find, read profiles). It distinguishes from siblings which focus on other aspects like activity or inventory.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of sibling tools or when not to use it. The description does not address prerequisites or selection criteria.

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