xkcd_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It accurately indicates a read operation (fetch), and for a simple comic retrieval, the behavior is transparent. However, no details on error handling or response format are given.

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 one sentence with no unnecessary words, making it concise. It could include more detail, but for a simple tool, this is acceptable.

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?

The tool has low complexity (1 param, no output schema). The description covers the basic purpose but omits details like what is returned (e.g., comic image, metadata) or error handling. It is minimally complete.

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 compensate. The parameter 'comic_number' is self-explanatory, but the description does not add any additional semantics (e.g., valid range, required format).

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 action ('Fetch') and the resource ('specific xkcd comic'), and uniquely identifies it by number, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like xkcd_latest or xkcd_random.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., xkcd_search, xkcd_random), nor any conditions or prerequisites. It only states what it does.

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