Skip current non-Boss Blind

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the key behavior that Boss Blind is rejected locally. This is valuable context beyond the annotations, warning the agent that attempting to skip a Boss Blind will fail. It does not elaborate on other side effects, but the added rejection behavior justifies a 4.

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, compact sentence that fully conveys the tool's purpose and a key behavioral exception. No filler words, and all necessary information is front-loaded.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential scope (non-Boss blinds) and the rejection behavior. It doesn't mention return values, but the presence of get_state and other sibling tools makes that less critical. Overall, adequate for reliable invocation.

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?

The input schema fully describes the only parameter (expected_state_token) with its purpose and requirement. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 the action: 'Skip Small/Big Blind', with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by excluding Boss Blind. The title reinforces the non-Boss scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies when to use this tool: when the current blind is a Small or Big Blind. It explicitly notes Boss Blind will be rejected, which serves as an exclusion. While it doesn't name alternatives like 'select_blind', the context is clear enough for an agent.

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