hero_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It partially meets this by describing the output composition and data sources, but it does not clarify side effects, error behavior, or what the 'pointer' actually looks like in the response.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The parentheticals make it slightly awkward, but there is no wasted content.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotation support, the description is incomplete. It names some return components but omits acceptable hero values, the precise shape of the returned data, and how the 'pointer' is encoded or used.

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 schema has only a 'hero' property with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain the accepted format, naming conventions, or examples for the hero parameter, leaving the agent to guess.

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 identifies that the tool returns a hero's skills, specifically naming the totem skill (name and level count) and a pointer to the main active skill. It is not a tautology and gives concrete content details, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like totem_skill or skill_levels.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of get_hero / hero_level_stats is an implementation hint rather than usage direction, and no exclusions or preferred conditions are provided.

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