use_hint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key side effect: XP for the question is halved. That is genuinely useful behavioral context. It does not say whether the penalty stacks on repeated calls, whether the call is idempotent, or what happens for an invalid/answered question_id.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the trigger and followed by the effect and cost. Nothing is padded. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves gaps that hurt other dimensions.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should describe what a hint actually returns (text? multiple levels? reveal of the answer?), and it only says "Returns it." Combined with zero parameter documentation and no annotations, an agent lacks enough to call this reliably beyond the happy path.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does not mention either parameter. question_id can be loosely inferred from "this question," but user_id (default "default") and the expected id domain are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific action and resource: fetching a hint for the current question, plus the cost (XP halved). An agent can identify what it does without opening the schema. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like check_answer or skip_question, but no sibling overlaps its purpose, so differentiation is implicit.

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?

"The user asked for a hint" implies the trigger condition (user requests help on a question), and the XP penalty signals this is not the default path. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no statement about what happens if a hint is requested repeatedly or after answering.

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