Get a random hint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently discloses the caching behavior with 'local catalog cache (default 24h TTL)' and the refresh path, and it states the return format as Markdown. This is substantial beyond the schema, though it does not discuss randomness semantics or edge cases like cache misses.

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 contain the core purpose, output shape, caching behavior, and refresh path. Information is front-loaded, and no words are wasted.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary return shape (Markdown, same as get_hint) and operational behavior (cache TTL and refresh). It is adequate, though it relies on get_hint's definition for the full return structure and does not specify what happens if the catalog cache is empty.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is complete and the baseline is 4. The description still adds value by clarifying the output format and cache behavior, but there are no parameters to document.

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 clear action and resource: 'Get one random hint from uxhints.com' and specifies the output shape as 'same shape as get_hint: full content as Markdown.' It clearly differentiates the random selection from the more targeted get_hint, though it relies on a sibling tool for shape details rather than fully describing the resource itself.

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 implied: use this tool when a random hint is desired. The description gives specific guidance about cache freshness ('call refresh_hint_catalog to force an update'), but it does not explicitly say when to prefer random_hint over list_hints, search_hints, or get_hint, nor does it state exclusion criteria.

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