kupid_get_notices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it retrieves a list, but does not mention safety (e.g., read-only, idempotent), authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise, with a single sentence explaining the purpose followed by the parameters. It avoids unnecessary details and is well-structured. However, the parameter list is redundant with the schema, slightly reducing 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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks usage context, such as when to use this list tool versus the detail tool, and does not mention pagination behavior despite having page/count parameters. It is marginally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists the two parameters with defaults (page and count), but does not explain their meaning beyond their names. The defaults are already in the schema, so the description adds minimal value. It fails to provide semantic context like usage examples or accepted value ranges.

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 clearly states that the tool retrieves a list of notices from KUPID portal (verb: retrieve, resource: list of notices). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like `kupid_get_notice_detail`, which likely retrieves a single notice. A score of 4 reflects clarity but lack of differentiation.

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 context, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools like `kupid_get_notice_detail`. The description only explains what the tool does, not when to choose it.

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