ygo_get_daily_meta

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the categories of data surfaced (banlist notices, errata, tournament news), which implies a read-only retrieval operation, but says nothing about caching, freshness, network dependence, or what forceRefresh actually changes beyond the schema's one-line note.

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 front-loaded sentence with the action, granularity, and format up front, followed by the content types. No filler, though the YYYY-MM-DD parenthetical duplicates the schema.

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 three-optional-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers intent and content categories but not return structure or aggregation behavior. It is adequate but leaves the agent guessing about what a result set looks like.

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%, so all three parameters (date, format, forceRefresh) are already documented, including the YYYY-MM-DD example and the default-to-today behavior. The description restates the date format rather than adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'check the meta and banlist day by day' — and enumerates the content returned (emergency banlist notices, errata, tournament news). The daily granularity implicitly separates it from ygo_get_monthly_meta, but that sibling is never named.

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?

Usage is only implied: consult a specific date's meta/banlist state. There is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over ygo_get_monthly_meta, ygo_get_news, or ygo_sync_meta, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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