lounge_menu

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'FREE' (no cost) and 'Read' (non-mutating), which are key behavioral traits. It also mentions 'full catalog' to set expectations of comprehensiveness. While it doesn't detail output format or auth requirements, for a simple menu tool these are not critical gaps.

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 'Read', and every word adds value. The list of catalog items efficiently conveys scope without excess. This is a model of conciseness.

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, zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what it does, its scope, and its usage context ('Start here'). The many sibling tools are implicitly covered by the catalog overview, making this a well-rounded, self-sufficient description.

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 the description doesn't need to explain parameter syntax. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no parameter-related information, which is appropriate. The schema coverage is vacuously 100%.

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 tool's function: 'Read The Latent Lounge's full catalog' with an explicit list of contents (games, prices, tournament rules, duels, oracle, plaques). The 'Start here' directive differentiates it from sibling tools that perform specific actions, making it the entry point for exploring available capabilities.

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 phrase 'Start here' provides clear usage context, indicating this tool should be used first for orientation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool list and the catalog/full scope make it obvious that this is the overview tool. Since there are no 'when-not' examples, it falls short of a 5.

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