Fetch SkyBlock Auctions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that 'lookup' is an API-key path and that output is filtered unless raw is requested, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. It does not, however, describe pagination behavior or result caps, so it is helpful but not rich.

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?

Two tight sentences that front-load the mode list before the lookup dimensions. The closing clause 'Filters output for AI use' is vague filler that does not earn its place, but the overall size is appropriate for the tool's surface.

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 12-parameter, zero-coverage, no-output-schema tool, the description is too thin to let an agent call it correctly. It never explains how mode interacts with page/limit/binOnly/category, nor what the filtered result shape looks like, leaving key invocation decisions to guesswork.

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% across 12 parameters, so the description carries the full explanatory burden. It clarifies only the mode enum and the auction/player/profile lookup identifiers; page, limit, tier, search, binOnly, category, includeRaw, and the UUID formats go unexplained. Most parameters are undocumented in both places.

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 verb (Fetch) and resource (SkyBlock Auctions) and enumerates the three operating modes (active pages, recently ended, API-key lookups), which map cleanly onto the mode enum. It also names the three lookup dimensions (auction, player, profile). The only soft spot is the trailing filler phrase 'Filters output for AI use', which adds no distinguishing power.

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 enumeration of modes implies which request shape to pick, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no statement that lookup mode requires an API key or a concrete identifier, and no routing to any alternative tool. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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