get_hubs_metadata_by_metadata_id_postplay

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable context by defining 'transient' and giving examples (On Deck, Recently Added), which clarifies behavior beyond the schema. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, the endpoint, and a simple Args list. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or repetition. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, 1 required), rich annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the key parameter semantics and the endpoint. It does not describe return details, but the output schema covers that. No obvious gaps for correct invocation.

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 explain parameters. It does: metadata_id is described as 'The metadata ID for the hubs to fetch,' and only_transient is explained with the meaning of 'transient' and examples. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definitions, though metadata_id's explanation is brief.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get postplay hubs.' It includes the endpoint and distinguishes it from the sibling get_hubs_metadata_by_metadata_id by the 'postplay' qualifier, though it does not explicitly contrast them. The purpose is specific and understandable.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_hubs_metadata_by_metadata_id or list_hubs. It implies usage through the endpoint and the 'postplay' focus, but there is no guidance on conditions or exclusions, leaving some inference to the agent.

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