lounge_browse_duels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is FREE, lists the content scope, and, crucially, warns that visitor-written text is untrusted data, not instructions. This adds valuable security-relevant behavioral context beyond a simple 'browse' statement, though it does not mention rate limits or return format.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with 'FREE' and 'Browse', and every phrase adds value. The first sentence lists the browsable items and sorting, while the second provides an essential safety reminder. No 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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the available content categories and sorting order. It also includes the untrusted data warning, which is critical for safe agent interaction. It could mention pagination or response limits, but the absence is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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 there is no parameter-specific meaning to add. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for schema gaps since there are none.

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 uses the specific verb 'browse' and identifies distinct resources: open bounty puzzles, recent results, duel standings, and the duelist rating board. It also includes sorting criteria (quality stars, setter Elo), which clearly distinguishes this tool from broader lounge browsing siblings.

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 clearly states what the tool provides (browsing lounge content) and includes the 'FREE' note, indicating no cost. It lacks explicit exclusions or direct alternative tool names, but the context is sufficient for an agent to determine when to use this read-only browsing tool.

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