horizon_torn_getMyFactionPositions

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

The description only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but no annotations exist. Important behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the endpoint is cached are omitted. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 with no redundant words. While it is appropriately short, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it slightly less effective than it could be.

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 high complexity (many sibling faction tools) and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to define what 'positions' refers to (e.g., hierarchy roles, war positions) and does not help an agent understand the tool's purpose relative to similar tools.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning or usage hints for the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb and resource ('Get your faction's positions details'), which clearly indicates the tool retrieves positional information for the user's faction. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like horizon_torn_getMyFactionBasicInformation, leaving ambiguity about what 'positions' entails.

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 the many other faction-related siblings (e.g., horizon_torn_getMyFaction, horizon_torn_getMyFactionMembers). There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or context for selection.

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