lemonade_get_upgrade_catalog

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'names, card descriptions, prices and ownership state' in the displayed form, implying a read-only snapshot. It does not explicitly state there is no mutation, but 'browse' and the sibling buy_upgrade make this evident.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that lists exactly what is included with no redundant words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 zero-parameter catalog tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the resource and the fields returned (names, descriptions, prices, ownership state). 'As displayed' also indicates the data reflects the current game UI. No critical information is missing.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the empty schema is fully covered. No additional parameter semantics are necessary.

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 specifies the exact action (browse), the resource (upgrades), and the output contents (names, card descriptions, prices, ownership state). It clearly distinguishes from sibling buy_upgrade and other catalogs by naming 'upgrades' and 'ownership state'.

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 this is the read-only catalog for upgrades, and the context signals (sibling tools like buy_upgrade) make the usage clear. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or mention exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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