End the current prediction

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint: false, openWorldHint: true), the description adds that canceling refunds all channel points and that the tool only works for Lumia-created predictions. This provides useful behavioral context not captured in annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and important constraints (Lumia session, outcome matching). It lacks details about return value or error conditions, but for an action tool with no output schema and clear annotations, this is adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining that winning_outcome must match an outcome title case-insensitively, is required when resolving, and ignored when canceling. This supplements the schema descriptions.

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 resolves or cancels the current Twitch prediction. It specifies two distinct actions (resolve with a winning outcome, cancel with refund) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like end_poll or create_prediction.

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 explains when to use RESOLVED vs CANCELED and that winning_outcome is required only for resolving. It also notes the tool only works for predictions created through Lumia in the current session. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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