gta-tunables-status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must compensate. It discloses the browser fallback dependency and graceful degradation, but omits other behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, or result format. For a tool with no output schema, more transparency is needed.

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 two sentences front-loaded with purpose, followed by a behavioral note. No redundant words; every sentence adds value.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, no output schema). The description explains input (timestamps) and a dependency, but does not clarify return format, handling of omitted platform, or error conditions. 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%, and the description does not mention the 'platform' parameter or its enum values. Users cannot infer what each platform code means or how omitting the parameter affects results. The description fails to compensate for missing schema info.

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 the tool returns per-platform timestamps of the last GTA Online tunables update, explicitly calling it a 'daily-reset / new-content signal'. This distinguishes it from siblings like gta-reset-times or other business tools.

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?

The description mentions a browser fallback requirement and graceful degradation, giving some contextual usage hints. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., gta-reset-times) or provide exclusion criteria.

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