get_character_hexamatrix

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'retrieves information' without disclosing side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or return format. The read-only nature is implied but not stated. This is a minimal disclosure for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple retrieval tool, though it could be slightly longer to include usage context without losing efficiency.

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 the tool has only two parameters and an output schema, the description is adequate for basic invocation. However, it lacks usage context, such as how it relates to get_character_hexamatrix_stat, and does not mention any required prior steps (like obtaining an OCID). This makes it incomplete for a tool that is part of a larger character-information suite.

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% – both 'ocid' and 'date' are described in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('조회합니다' = retrieve) and resource ('캐릭터 HEXA매트릭스(6차 스킬)'), clearly identifying the tool's function. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_character_hexamatrix_stat, which likely returns stat-specific data, but the resource name is specific enough to avoid tautology.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., obtaining an OCID via get_character_ocid) or when to prefer this over get_character_hexamatrix_stat. The description only states what it does, not when to call it.

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