signallord_get_gauge_breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds useful behavioral context (free vs premium tiers, 0-10 scale) but does not cover additional traits like rate limits or data freshness. With good annotations, the added value is moderate.

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?

Three efficient sentences: purpose, tier details, scoring scale. No wasted words, front-loaded with action.

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?

Description covers core functionality, tier differentiation, and scoring semantics. Output schema exists, so return values are documented elsewhere. Missing minor details like 'underlying metrics', but overall complete for a simple read tool.

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?

Only one parameter (response_format) with default value. Schema description coverage is 0%, but the parameter is trivial. The description does not explain the parameter, but it's not critical. Baseline 4 for 0 params is adjusted down slightly due to no mention.

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?

Description states 'Get individual scores for Signal Lord gauges with underlying metrics', clearly indicating the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like composite score or history, but could be more explicit about which specific gauges are included.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools like signallord_get_composite_score or signallord_get_gauge_history. The description only mentions tier differences but does not help an agent choose among alternatives.

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