Get Clash Royale clan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states 'Full details' but does not disclose what fields are returned, whether the operation is read-only (likely but unstated), or any rate limits/authentication requirements. The brief description leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it could be restructured to include more details without becoming verbose, such as listing key fields or usage hints.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and minimal description, the tool definition lacks completeness. An agent cannot determine the expected output, error conditions, or how to handle the single parameter appropriately.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description mentions 'by tag,' which adds meaning beyond the schema (which only defines 'tag' as a string). However, it does not specify the required format (e.g., hash prefix, length) or provide examples. Marginally helpful.

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 'Full details for a clan by tag,' indicating the verb (retrieve) and the resource (clan details). It distinguishes from siblings like 'cr_get_clan_members' by implying a broader scope, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools for other games (e.g., 'coc_get_clan').

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'cr_search_clans' for searching or 'cr_get_clan_members' for members. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., valid tag format) or use cases.

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