Build SkyBlock Guide Context

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so safety needs no restating. The description adds a genuinely useful disclosure the annotations lack: the HYPIXEL_API_KEY authentication requirement. It says nothing about rate limits, caching, or the size/composition of the aggregated payload for a fan-out call.

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, with the composite purpose front-loaded ahead of the prerequisite. Nothing is padded, though the auth sentence could have carried some parameter guidance instead of standing alone.

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 21-parameter, no-required-argument aggregation tool with no output schema, the description is far too thin. An agent gets no picture of output size (e.g. includeRawNbt, includeAllNbtData), how optional flags interact, or what the returned context actually contains, which is exactly what this tool's name promises.

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?

With 21 parameters and only 62% schema description coverage, the description is the only place to compensate, and it adds almost nothing: no explanation of goals, uuid vs username vs profileId vs memberUuid, or how the include*/max* toggles shape the output. The mention of 'mayor and economy signals' loosely maps to includeMayor/includeEconomy but is not a substitute for parameter guidance.

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 a composite resource ('profile plus current mayor and economy signals') and frames the downstream goal (writing tailored progression advice). This is enough to distinguish it from plain data fetchers like skyblock_profile, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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 'so an AI can write tailored SkyBlock progression advice' clause implies the intended use case (advice generation, not raw data retrieval), and it notes the HYPIXEL_API_KEY prerequisite. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over skyblock_profile, skyblock_profiles, or the related advisor tools, nor on how the many include*/max* flags should be chosen.

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