list_achievements

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

No annotations provided, so description is sole source. It discloses filter behaviors (AND match for tags, case-insensitive substring for keyword). However, it omits return format, pagination, sorting, or error handling, which are important for a listing tool.

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?

Single sentence conveys all key information with zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose and filters.

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?

Given 4 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers filter semantics but lacks details on pagination, ordering, or response structure. Adequate for simple use but not fully 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?

Schema has 100% coverage with descriptions. Description rephrases filter semantics (date range, tags AND match, keyword case-insensitive) but adds limited new meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb 'list' and resource 'achievements' with specific filter types (date range, tags, keyword). Distinguishes from siblings like get_achievement (single item) and CRUD tools.

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?

Implied usage: use for filtered listing of achievements. Does not explicitly mention when to prefer siblings (e.g., get_achievement for single item), but context is clear enough.

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