list_resets

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden, and it does disclose the payload semantics: three reset categories, timezone (UTC), and that countdowns are included. It does not say whether the list is computed live or cached, or how many entries per category, but for a zero-parameter informational read the disclosure is solid.

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 payload description. "No arguments" is mildly redundant with the empty schema but serves as a fast confirmation and costs almost nothing.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey the return value, and it names the three reset categories, the timezone, and the countdown format. For a zero-parameter read-only utility, nothing an agent needs to call it or interpret the result is missing.

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 the baseline is 4. The explicit "No arguments" reinforces the empty schema but adds no semantic content beyond it.

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?

A specific verb ("Show") plus a specific resource ("next FFXIV daily, grand-company, and weekly reset times") with output format details (UTC, countdowns). An agent knows exactly what comes back, though it does not contrast itself with the sibling list_characters/list_tasks or explain that it is a static reference tool unrelated to the task CRUD group.

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 arguments" clarifies how to invoke but not when to use it versus siblings. The use case (checking imminent game resets) is implied by the content but no condition, trigger, or exclusion is stated; a reader must infer it from the FFXIV domain nouns.

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