getControllableBots

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose ('Get... configurations') and does not disclose read-only status, return format, or any edge cases. The verb 'Get' implies a read operation but this is not explicitly stated, leaving a transparency gap.

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 concise sentence with an illustrative list ('Smasher, Climber, Attacker, etc.'). It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, and every word contributes meaning without unnecessary fluff.

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 getter without annotations or output schema, the description gives the core purpose but lacks details about the return structure or content of the configurations. It does not clarify whether it returns a list, specific fields, or behavior when no bots are available, leaving some ambiguity.

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 schema coverage is complete and there is no need for parameter documentation. The description's examples of bot types provide useful context about the returned data, which is sufficient given the absence of parameters.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with the resource 'controllable companion bot configurations' and lists examples (Smasher, Climber, Attacker), making the purpose clear. It is specific enough to distinguish from unrelated getters, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling getPacerBot.

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?

No explicit usage guidance or alternatives are provided. The intended use is implied by the name and description: to retrieve controllable companion bot configurations. But there is no mention of when not to use it or how it relates to similar tools like getPacerBot.

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