useless_fact_today

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false, and openWorldHint, so safety and repeat-call behavior are covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — it doesn't say what timezone defines 'today', whether the fact changes at midnight, or where the fact comes from. Some added value, but only marginal over structured fields.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and scope. It is slightly redundant ('useless fact' restating the tool name plus 'fact of the day'), but there is no filler or wasted clause.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and full annotation coverage, only a bare minimum of description is needed. Still, the definition omits what 'today' means (timezone/rotation) and never points at useless_fact_random as the alternative, leaving a small but real routing gap.

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 schema baseline for this dimension is 4. There is no argument semantics the description needs to compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('useless fact of the day'), and the word 'today's' implies a day-scoped selection that separates it from a random-fact tool. It never names the obvious sibling useless_fact_random, so the differentiation must be inferred rather than read.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not statement. The time qualifier 'today's' implicitly signals a stable daily fact versus a random draw, but the agent is left to connect that to useless_fact_random on its own.

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