get_station_shipyard

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Naming 'Shipyard.json' hints that this reads local journal-derived data, but it says nothing about what happens if the commander is not docked, if the station has no shipyard, or how stale the data may be.

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?

One short sentence with no wasted words and the resource front-loaded. However, the brevity crosses into under-specification rather than efficient concision.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But for a tool whose only parameter is entirely undocumented and which has no annotations, the description leaves the agent without enough to call it confidently in ambiguous situations.

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% for the single optional parameter journal_dir, and the description never mentions it. An agent gets no explanation of what journal_dir points at, whether to override the default, or how it affects results.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: retrieving the station's shipyard stock, and names the underlying data file (Shipyard.json). The resource ('shipyard' vs. market/outfitting) implicitly separates it from siblings like get_station_market and get_station_outfitting, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 call this instead of get_station_market, get_station_outfitting, or find_ship. Neither prerequisites (must be docked at a station with a shipyard) nor failure conditions are mentioned.

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