unlock_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 discloses the most important hidden behavior: point deduction on cost-bearing hints and ordering constraints for dependent hints. It omits auth/permission requirements and what happens on a repeat unlock, but the risky side effect is surfaced.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, the cost warning follows immediately, and the Args block is a single line. Slightly redundant with the schema's required-field declaration but not wasteful.

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 one-parameter action with an output schema, the description covers what the tool does, the key side effect, and where the ID comes from; return values need not be explained. Missing only edge cases like re-unlocking or error behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it does so by explaining that hint_id is the numeric id available in the 'challenge' tool result, which is more useful than a bare type declaration. It adds no validation or format detail beyond that, so not a 5.

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 verb and resource ('Unlock a challenge hint') plus the side effect of returning content, which is enough to separate it from siblings like 'challenge' and 'challenges'. The reference to hint IDs coming from the 'challenge' tool ties it into the workflow 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?

Gives concrete context for use: hints cost points when 'cost' is non-zero, and prerequisite hint IDs must be unlocked in order. It does not name an alternative tool or state when *not* to unlock, but the operational conditions are clear.

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