horizon_torn_getRacingTimestamp

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It lacks any behavioral disclosure: no mention of caching, rate limiting, authentication requirements, or side effects. The description is too brief to inform an agent about operational characteristics.

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 sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It lacks structure and fails to provide necessary detail. The brevity here reflects incompleteness rather than efficiency.

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 simple timestamp tool without output schema, the description should specify the output format or typical use case. It does not. Given many sibling timestamp tools, context about the racing scope is missing, leaving the tool insufficiently described.

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%, so the schema adequately describes the three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'Get current server time', which does not elaborate on parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 current server time', which is clear verb+resource. However, the tool name includes 'Racing', but the description does not mention racing, causing ambiguity among multiple similar timestamp tools. It does not distinguish from siblings like horizon_torn_getFactionTimestamp.

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 on when to use this tool vs the many other timestamp tools. With numerous siblings returning timestamps for different scopes, this omission is significant. The description provides no context for selection.

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