he_get_user_ratings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool reads ratings but does not mention pagination, authorization needs, or whether it returns both host and guest ratings. This is insufficient for a mutation-free read tool.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. However, it could benefit from a brief note on return format or number of results. Still, it is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 straightforward get tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose. It does not explain what fields the ratings contain, but this might be inferred. The tool is simple enough that the description is largely 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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (limit and userId). The description adds minimal extra meaning ('as host and guest') but does not elaborate on parameter usage or format. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'reviews/ratings about a user', and specifies context 'as host and guest'. This distinguishes it from potentially related sibling tools like 'he_get_ratings' but could be more explicit about what 'as host and guest' entails.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'he_get_ratings'). The description does not provide context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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