get_military_intelligence

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

Since no annotations are given, the description must cover behavioral traits. It explains what data is returned (strength, aggressiveness, tech targets) and scope (all civilizations), but does not disclose potential costs, side effects, or whether the data is computed or cached. Adequate but not thorough.

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 sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the action ('Get') and listing key outputs. It is concise and structured efficiently.

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 is minimal. It covers the main purpose and scope (all civilizations), but lacks details on return format or data nesting. Adequate for a simple tool, but could be more explicit about per-civilization structure.

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?

With zero parameters, the description cannot add parameter meaning beyond the schema, but it does explain what the tool returns, which is valuable. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets that by clarifying the output.

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 verb 'Get' and specifies the resources: military strength, combat desire, and preferred military tech targets for all civilizations. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_civ_statistics or get_strategic_overview by focusing on military intelligence.

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 such as get_civ_statistics or get_strategic_overview, nor any prerequisites or scenarios. The description simply states what it does without contextualizing its role among sibling tools.

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