get_user_contributions

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not mention any behavioral aspects such as permissions, rate limits, side effects, or return format. The agent has no insight into the tool's behavior.

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 too sparse given the complexity of parameters and lack of other metadata. It under-specifies important details, failing to earn its place.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and five parameters with no descriptions, the description provides almost no context. The tool's behavior, pagination, filtering, and response structure are completely opaque.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description only mentions 'username'. It does not explain the other parameters (page, per_page, sort, sort_order), leaving their meaning and usage completely undocumented.

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 states it retrieves user contributions by username, which is a specific verb+resource. However, 'contributions' is vague and not clearly defined in the Discogs context, making it only moderately clear.

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 like get_user_submissions or get_user_inventory. The agent receives no context for selecting this tool over siblings.

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