getCalculations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states what data is retrieved, but does not mention whether this is a read-only operation, any side effects, or prerequisites. The 'get' prefix implies read-only, but explicit disclosure is absent.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is concise, front-loaded with the action, and contains no superfluous information.

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?

With only one optional parameter, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details about the return format or how currentLevel influences the results. It does not reference any edge cases or additional context, making it minimally complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter (currentLevel: 'Current player level'). The description's mention of 'level progression data' indirectly relates to the parameter but does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: retrieving XP and coin reward calculations and level progression data. The verb 'Get' combined with specific resources (XP, coin rewards, level progression) makes the purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from other get* siblings that focus on different domains.

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 the tool is for accessing reward/level data, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like getPlayerData or getGameTitleData. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references, so usage context is only implied.

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