get_points_scores

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does reveal a behavioral trait by stating the default user, but it does not describe output format, authentication requirements, or limitations. The verb 'Get' implies read-only but does not explicitly guarantee it.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and no filler. It earns its place despite being terse.

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-optional-parameter read tool, the description is minimally callable, but it lacks an output schema and any note on limits or response shape. An agent would still be uncertain what 'breakdown' includes or how it differs from get_points_history.

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% and the username parameter has no schema description, but the description compensates by indicating the default behavior: 'defaults to the logged-in user' implies the optional username parameter overrides the target user. This is enough to infer the parameter's role.

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 specific action and resource: 'Get energy points score breakdown' and adds a scope detail, 'defaults to the logged-in user.' It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling get_points_history, so it stops short of a 5.

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 'defaults to the logged-in user' phrase implies the tool is for fetching points breakdowns, optionally for another user, but no when-to-use or alternative guidance is given. With a large sibling list including get_points_history, explicit differentiation would help.

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