overview_get_round_data

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the description states exactly what data is returned, but it does not disclose potential nuances such as timezone, null behavior, or whether the data is cached. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not richly transparent.

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 that immediately states the tool's purpose. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly efficient and easy to parse for an AI agent.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the essential information. It tells the agent what data will be retrieved. It could mention the response format or data type, but the current level is sufficient for a straightforward getter.

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 there is nothing to document. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description correctly omits parameter details. No additional parameter semantics are needed.

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: 'Get current round number and start time of the competition.' It names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('round number and start time'), which is distinct from sibling tools like overview_get_data or scoreboard_get_bar_data. This fully clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: whenever the current round number and start time are needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is self-evident and unambiguous. Since no alternatives are mentioned, it falls slightly short of a 5 but is still well above minimal guidance.

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