hero_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently explains that stats are live and come via an unofficial third-party calculator, and it clarifies parameter semantics like reincarnation=1 meaning the normal evolved form. It does not cover error behavior or data freshness, but for a read-only calculator it is reasonably transparent.

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 dense but every sentence contributes: source, returned stats, parameter formats, and special values. It could be slightly better organized, but it is appropriately sized for a parameter-heavy 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?

Given the 10-parameter schema with zero description coverage and no output schema, the description does a strong job of making the tool callable. It explains most non-obvious parameters and enumerates return fields. Minor gaps remain around skill_lvl, camp_lvl, and output formatting, but these are not severe.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents level range, talent name/id format, talent_lvl range, reincarnation meaning, and numeric id semantics for camp/pet/inscription. However, it leaves camp_lvl and skill_lvl unexplain beyond their schema defaults.

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 tool computes live, fully-computed hero stats and lists exactly which stats are returned. It distinguishes itself by noting it uses casclash's calculator rather than an official IGG API, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as hero_stats_calc or hero_level_stats.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need final computed stats at a given level. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative sibling tools that might be more appropriate for raw data, formulas, or partial stat lookups.

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