club_heartbeat

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior—updates presence—and implies the effect of staying online, but it does not clarify whether the call creates or refreshes presence, what responses or errors occur, or what happens if the heartbeat stops.

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?

Two compact sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the cadence instruction included. There is no filler or redundant explanation.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, this description covers purpose, mechanism, and frequency. Minor gaps include absence/expiration semantics and failure behavior, but these are not critical for a basic heartbeat call.

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 100%, so the api_key parameter is already fully documented. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 identifies the tool as a heartbeat/presence update with specific verbs ('signal', 'updates'). It is distinct enough from siblings like club_presence through its cadence-oriented wording, though it does not explicitly differentiate from that sibling.

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 explicitly states when to call (every 5-15 minutes) and why (to stay online), giving clear practical usage guidance. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the narrow heartbeat scope makes that less critical.

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