get_skymiles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the authentication requirement ('Requires being logged in'), which is valuable context. However, it doesn't describe other behavioral traits like rate limits, error conditions, response format, or whether this is a read-only operation (though implied by 'Check').

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 two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by an essential prerequisite. Every word earns its place—no redundancy, no fluff, and it efficiently communicates both what the tool does and when to use it.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is reasonably complete for a simple read operation. It covers the purpose and authentication need. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral context (e.g., response format, error handling) to fully guide the agent.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, maintaining focus on what the tool does rather than inputs. A baseline of 4 is applied for zero-parameter tools when the description doesn't mislead about 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?

The description clearly states the specific verb ('Check') and resource ('SkyMiles account'), listing exactly what information is retrieved (balance, Medallion status, tier-qualifying miles, recent activity). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_booking' or 'get_flight_status' by focusing on loyalty program data rather than flight operations.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('Check your SkyMiles account...') and includes a prerequisite ('Requires being logged in'), which is helpful guidance. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives among siblings (e.g., whether 'get_booking' might overlap with 'recent activity').

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