List wheel favorites

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful provenance (data lives in SaveData.WheelFavs) but says nothing about return shape, ordering, or what an empty result means.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope (dance/moveset, WheelFavs) comes first and the explanatory gloss trails it. The GTA reference is arguably jargon that could be dropped, but it aids recognition.

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 no-param, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description conveys what is listed and where it comes from, which is enough to call it correctly. Only minor gaps remain (return format, ordering).

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?

Zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. Schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate.

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?

Specific verb ("Show") plus concrete resource ("SaveData.WheelFavs dance/moveset name lists"), and the parenthetical clarifies the concept as a GTA-style quick wheel. It is distinguishable from add_favorite/remove_favorite by the list/show semantics, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer you call this to inspect existing wheel favorites. Nothing states when to prefer it over reanim_get_savedata or the add/remove_favorite pair, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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