get_victory_progress

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds valuable behavioral context by listing specific data points included (space race VP, diplomatic VP, etc.), which goes beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each clearly front-loaded: purpose in first, details in second, usage frequency in third. No wasted words.

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?

With no parameters, read-only annotation, and output schema expected, the description covers all necessary information: what data is included and how often to use. Complete for a simple polling tool.

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?

No parameters exist (0), so description cannot add meaning beyond schema. Baseline 4 applies per guidelines since there's nothing to explain.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get victory condition progress for all civilizations' with specific verb and resource. Lists included victory types, distinguishing it from other 'get_*' sibling tools that focus on different aspects of the game.

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?

Explicit guidance to 'Call every 20-30 turns to track the race.' While no alternatives or when-not-to-use are mentioned, the simple nature and specific timing advice provide clear usage context.

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