get_effects

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

The description indicates a read operation, which is standard for retrieval. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it does not disclose behaviors like pagination, result format, or any side effects. It is minimal but sufficient for a simple, parameterless read.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly concise.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the tool's purpose. However, it could mention the return type (list of effects) or any limitations for completeness.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema (100% coverage). The description does not add parameter info, but none is needed. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4 per guidance.

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 ('Retrieve effects') and the target resource ('EVE Online API'). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_effect' (singular), which may return a single effect. This ambiguity limits purpose clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_effect' or other list retrieval tools. The agent is left to infer usage without explicit context.

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