Achievements & closet

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description reinforces that while adding useful context about where mutations occur. It also describes what is returned at a high level, though it does not discuss pagination or exact response shape.

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, front-loaded with the core read action, and every clause maps to useful content or behavioral context. The themed wording does not obstruct the operational meaning.

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 read-only progress-inspection tool with no output schema, the description covers the main return categories and mutation boundary well. It leaves only minor gaps around exact payload structure and view-specific behavior.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, including the view enum and only_locked flag, so the parameters are already well documented. The description does not add new syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: it reads the progress rail and enumerates achievements, wardrobe, toasts, and counters. It also distinguishes this read-only inspection tool from the sibling care/action tools that actually perform unlocks.

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?

It clearly establishes this as the inspection tool and explicitly says unlocks happen through other care tools and the ticker. It does not spell out when to prefer each view or how it relates to siblings like femboy_ack_toast or femboy_changes_since, but the usage context is still clear.

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