Estado y juegos actuales de mis amigos

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already cover safety and data scope, so the description only adds the real-time behavior of the data. This is useful but modest; it does not disclose return shape, pagination, latency expectations, or how the status is determined.

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 conveys the full purpose and the real-time qualifier without any redundant wording.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description adequately conveys what data is returned: online friends and their current game. However, the absence of an output schema leaves response format unspecified, and the description does not clarify whether offline friends are also included.

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 baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify beyond the empty 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 a specific verb ('Obtiene') and a clear resource ('amigos online y qué juego específico están jugando'), with a strong real-time qualifier ('en tiempo real', 'en este instante'). It conceptually distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_friend_list or get_friends_recent_activity, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus siblings such as get_friends_recent_activity or get_recently_played_games. The use case is only implicitly conveyed by the wording, with no when-to-use or when-not-to-use direction.

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