Get player achievement progress

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

With no annotations provided, the description accurately uses 'Fetches' to indicate a read-only operation. It adds the behavioral trait of including uncompleted achievements, which is helpful. However, no additional details on safety or permissions are given, but for a fetch tool this is sufficient.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's action and scope.

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 fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what it does and includes the key point about uncompleted achievements. It could mention the output format or pagination, but it is fairly 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 input schema has 100% coverage for its single parameter, with a clear description of username case-insensitivity and format. The tool description does not add any parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states it fetches a player's achievement progress for all achievements, including uncompleted ones. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'wom_get_player_achievements' which likely only returns completed achievements.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'wom_get_player_achievements'. The description only states its purpose but does not provide when-not-to-use or mention any other tool.

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