acnh_fish

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List all' implies a non-destructive read and 'availability and prices' hints at the returned fields, but nothing states whether results are paginated, filtered, or complete in one call. The gap is small for a zero-argument lookup, but the behavioral profile is only partially disclosed.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and it uses the remaining clause to name the useful return fields. No filler or 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?

For a no-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description gives the domain, the universe of items, and the two main attributes returned. An agent has enough to call it and interpret the result, though the exact record shape and result count remain undisclosed.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter semantics for the description to compensate for. Nothing in the description is needed or misleading regarding inputs.

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?

Specific verb (List), specific resource (Animal Crossing: New Horizons fish), and explicit scope (all) with the data returned (availability and prices). An agent can distinguish it from acnh_bugs and acnh_villagers purely from the resource noun, without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied: it is the only fish tool among the acnh_* siblings, so there is no alternative to route away from and no explicit when-to-use statement. No exclusions or conditions are given, leaving only the inference that it is for looking up ACNH fish data.

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