horizon_torn_getFactionRackets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states it retrieves a list, implying a read operation, but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, caching behavior, or what 'current' means. This is insufficient.

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 very short (one sentence) but under-informative. It is concise in length but fails to earn its place by providing meaningful context. It is not misleading but could be more valuable.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should at least hint at the structure of returned data or explain what rackets are. It does not. With a large set of sibling tools, the lack of context makes it hard for an agent to select correctly.

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 100% with all three parameters (key, comment, timestamp) adequately described in the schema. The tool description adds no new information about parameters. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get a list of current rackets', which is a verb+resource. However, it does not clarify what rackets are in the Torn game context, nor does it distinguish this from many other faction-related sibling tools (e.g., getFactionBasicInformation, getFactionChain). The name implies faction rackets, but the description is vague.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, target faction, or context (e.g., whether it returns rackets for the user's faction or a specified one). The description lacks any usage direction.

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