Juegos jugados recientemente por mis amigos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying that only the most active friends are scanned and that a two-week window is used, which goes beyond what annotations convey.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and purpose. Every phrase earns its place, with no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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 low-complexity read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what the tool does and when to call it. It does not describe the exact return structure, but the simplicity of the tool and the clear purpose make this a minor gap rather than a critical omission.

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 100%, so the limit parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameter beyond the schema's own explanation about limiting active friends to avoid saturating the API, warranting the baseline score.

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 action ('Escanea la actividad'), the target resource ('tus amigos más activos'), and the time window ('últimas 2 semanas'). It distinguishes the tool from current-status siblings by emphasizing recent activity over a two-week period, though it does not explicitly name any 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?

The description implies the intended use case ('para saber qué se está jugando') and gives a temporal scope, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_recently_played_games or get_friends_current_status. No exclusion criteria or alternative routing is mentioned.

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