gift_helper

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses the tool reads from the save file, lists birthdays within a window, and flags held loved gifts. No destructive or side effects are implied. Transparency is adequate.

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 concise, front-loaded with main functionality, and uses only necessary sentences. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and limitations.

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?

Although no output schema exists, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (birthdays, hearts, loved gifts, flags). It lacks detail on return format but covers the essential content for a helper tool.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal new information beyond the schema, such as the window for upcoming days. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: per-villager birthdays, current hearts, notable loved gifts, flagging held gifts, and listing upcoming birthdays. It explicitly distinguishes from wiki_page by noting loved-gift lists are a curated summary, not authoritative.

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 implicitly guides when to use (for quick gift info and birthdays) and explicitly advises using wiki_page for authoritative lists. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios, but the alternative is clear.

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