htb_fortress_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'Return details' without mentioning side effects, permissions, or whether it is read-only. The agent cannot infer safety or constraints beyond the name.

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 a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could include more useful details without losing conciseness.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and zero schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'details' include, return format, or prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid fortress ID). The agent lacks sufficient context to fully understand the tool's output.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not explain the parameter. The schema has a single 'fortress_id' with type integer, but the description repeats 'fortress id' without adding format, source, or behavioral context. No value added beyond the 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 'Return details for a fortress id.' clearly states the verb (Return) and resource (details for a fortress id). It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like htb_list_fortresses, though the singular 'details' implies a specific fortress retrieval.

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 versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't suggest using it after retrieving a fortress ID from htb_list_fortresses or indicate it is not for submission actions like htb_submit_fortress_flag.

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