List Game Center leaderboards

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

There are no annotations, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It indicates a read/list operation but gives no details on pagination, ordering, authorization, or whether 'all' leaderboards are returned in a single response. No side effects or result characteristics are described.

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 short, direct sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 one-parameter list operation, the schema covers the only required input and the description clarifies the scope. However, with no output schema or annotations, the agent is left without information on response shape, pagination, or failures, so completeness is only partial.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema as coming from get_game_center_detail. The description only says 'for a Game Center detail' and adds no semantic or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies due to 100% schema coverage.

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 action (list) and resource (leaderboards) scoped to a Game Center detail, making it distinguishable from sibling tools like list_game_center_leaderboard_versions and create/delete leaderboard tools. The wording is unambiguous.

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 given about when to prefer this over siblings or when not to use it, such as requesting leaderboard versions or creating leaderboards. The description simply restates the operation without routing the agent to alternatives.

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