Service info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content expectations (free vs token costs, rules location) but does not reveal deeper behavioral traits such as response format or whether information may be cached.

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 extremely concise, with two short sentences that each earn their place. It front-loads the content and gives a direct call-time instruction without wasted words.

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 zero-parameter informational tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns conceptually and when to call it, and the output schema covers concrete return values.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter documentation is not needed. The baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter ambiguity to resolve.

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 that the tool explains what Magic Master does, what is free versus token-costed, and where rules live, so the general purpose is clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_pricing or check_limits, which may overlap in content.

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?

It gives explicit timing guidance: 'Call once at the start of a session.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to an alternative, but for a session-intro tool this is clear enough context.

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