get_account_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return values (PUUID, account level, player card, region info) and the required parameters, but does not mention prerequisites like API key setup, rate limits, or error handling. This is adequate but not rich in behavioral context.

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 and well-structured with a brief intro, argument explanations, and return list. The phrase 'Essential tool' adds slight promotion but does not waste space. It is front-loaded with the purpose, making it easy to scan.

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 and has an output schema, so the description need not detail returns exhaustively. However, it lacks context about when to use versus alternative tools, potential prerequisites (e.g., API key), and any caveats. The description is sufficient for basic understanding but leaves some gaps for a fully informed decision.

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 compensates by explaining each parameter: name is the player's in-game name, tag is the player's tag, and region includes a list of codes (ap, na, eu, kr, br, latam). This goes beyond the schema's bare property names and adds useful meaning, though it does not specify the tag format or default region.

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 'Get account details for a Valorant player' and specifies the purpose as obtaining PUUID and account information. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like match history or MMR tools by focusing on account-level data.

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 emphasizes this as the 'essential tool for getting PUUID,' implying it is the go-to for account identification. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the context of sibling tools and the stated purpose provides clear guidance for typical usage.

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