lichess_puzzle_daily

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits, but it only says 'Get the Lichess daily puzzle'. It omits critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, and return value structure.

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 of five words, efficient and front-loaded. Every word is meaningful for conveying the core purpose.

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?

Despite having no parameters, the tool has no output schema and the description fails to indicate what the daily puzzle response contains (e.g., puzzle ID, FEN, solution). This leaves the agent without critical context for using the returned data.

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 the schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not need to add parameter meaning since there are none, resulting in a baseline score of 4.

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 'Get the Lichess daily puzzle' clearly states the action (get) and the specific resource (daily puzzle) on a specific platform (Lichess). It distinguishes its purpose from sibling tools like 'lichess_top_players' and 'chess_puzzles_random'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'lichess_user_games' or 'chess_puzzles_random'. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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