Get HitKeep Opportunities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds value by explaining that the tool returns saved localized Opportunities recommendations without raw prompts or provider payloads, clarifying the processed nature of the output beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Read saved localized Opportunities recommendations') and includes a useful clarification. No wasted words or redundant information.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters (all documented), annotations indicating safety, and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the core functionality and constraints. Could be improved by providing a bit more context on when to use this over siblings, but overall adequate.

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 description coverage is 100% with all three parameters documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning for parameters like limit, status, or site_id beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 clearly states the tool reads saved localized Opportunities recommendations for one site. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying it returns processed recommendations without raw prompts or provider payloads, which is a specific verb+resource combination.

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?

The description implies usage for reading reviewed opportunities but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'without raw prompts or provider payloads' which hints at differences but doesn't name sibling tools or provide clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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