golden_walnuts

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

No annotations are provided. The description discloses what the tool returns but does not mention any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or authentication needs. As a progress checker, it is likely safe, but this is not confirmed.

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 front-loads the tool's purpose. It is efficient, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points or separate sentences.

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 lack of output schema, the description lists the return components but does not specify their format or structure. For a tool with one parameter, the description is adequate but could be more complete by detailing the output format.

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 100%; the description for the save_path parameter is detailed. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 provides progress information about golden walnuts on Ginger Island, listing specific data points (found vs 130, unspent balance, island unlock status, repeatable-source progress). It distinguishes itself from siblings by being specifically about golden walnuts.

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 implies usage for checking golden walnut progress but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many sibling tools, some guidance on when to prefer this would be helpful.

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