get_great_people

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds specific behavioral details (shows availability, cost, civilization), but does not disclose any additional traits beyond what annotations and the tool's purpose imply. With annotations present, the description adds moderate value.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no superfluous words. Every sentence adds value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 zero parameters, readOnlyHint annotation, and the presence of an output schema (though not shown), the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns (available Great People, cost, civilization), leaving no gaps for a read-only listing tool.

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, and schema description coverage is 100% trivial. The description does not need to add parameter information because none exist. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, indicating the description adequately handles the parameter aspect.

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 tool shows 'available Great People and recruitment progress', including specific details like recruitment cost and which civilization is recruiting. This is a specific verb ('shows') and resource ('Great People'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'recruit_great_person' or 'get_gp_advisor'.

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 usage for viewing Great People availability but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_gp_advisor' or 'recruit_great_person'. No exclusions or guidance are provided, leaving the agent to infer context from tool names.

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