Get GTAV Enhanced capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. It adds the context that the result is 'verified' and intended as pre-coding knowledge, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether it performs version checks or network calls. With annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 one clear, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the purpose and usage context without any filler.

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?

The tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values. The description adequately conveys the tool's role as a pre-coding baseline provider. It could elaborate on what the baseline includes, but given the presence of an output schema and low complexity, it is sufficiently complete.

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 accepts zero parameters, so the input schema fully covers parameter semantics. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'Return[s] the verified GTAV Enhanced baseline and the context that must be known before writing code.' The verb 'Return' and resource are specific, and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like search_fivem_docs or get_native. Slight vagueness in 'baseline' prevents a 5.

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 usage context with 'before writing code,' suggesting when to call this tool. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it, which limits the guidance.

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