get_trend_analysis

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

No annotations exist, so description must cover behavior. It discloses what trends are included and highlights provided, but does not state non-destructiveness, performance, data limits, or any side effects.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Without output schema, the description should clarify return format or structure. It lists what is shown but not how the agent can use the returned data, leaving some ambiguity for automated processing.

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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema coverage; schema already explains its purpose. The description adds context about what the trend analysis covers, aligning with schema, but no extra parameter-level detail is needed.

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?

Clearly states the tool analyzes trends across multiple game metrics (score, science, etc.) and highlights specific patterns (military buildups, fastest growing, declining), distinguishing it from snapshot or comparison tools.

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?

Describes use case (analyze trends) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings like get_civ_statistics or get_yield_comparison, and no mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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