List Lineage 2 chronicles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation by using 'List every', identifies the data source ('tracked by L2 Calendar'), and specifies the returned fields. It doesn't mention error cases or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter list tool this is adequate and adds meaningful context.

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 sentences with zero fluff. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and output, the second delivers the key usage instruction. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool with no annotations, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns and how to use it downstream (filter for list_servers). An agent has everything it needs to call and apply the result correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds a practical usage hint about how to use the returned slugs with list_servers, but since there are no parameters, it cannot add parameter-level meaning. The baseline score is correct.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('every Lineage 2 chronicle tracked by L2 Calendar'), and the data returned ('slug, display name and order'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with servers or labels.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Use the slugs as the chronicle filter for list_servers.' This gives a clear, actionable use case. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the alternative tools are clearly different in scope, so a 4 is appropriate.

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