List dungeon pulls

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context about the returned data (pull windows, locations, map IDs, NPC IDs) but does not discuss behaviors such as pagination, scoping to a fight/report, or authorization nuances.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose and distinguishing it from other list tools.

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 read-only list operation with strong annotation coverage and a schema that documents all but one parameter, the description is nearly complete. It states what will be returned and in which domain. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly say the pulls are scoped to the report/fight identified by the required parameters, though this is inferable from the schema.

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 description coverage is 80%, so the schema already documents the main parameters. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond naming output fields like map IDs and enemy NPC IDs, which are not parameters. This matches the baseline for a well-covered schema.

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 'List' and names the exact resource set: Mythic+ pull windows, locations, map IDs, and participating enemy NPC IDs. This clearly distinguishes the tool from any sibling that might also deal with fights or Mythic+ data.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool versus alternatives such as list_fights or get_mythic_plus_summary. The intended use case is implied by the name and description, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative mentions.

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