kilter_get_grade_pyramid

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, notably the ordering 'hardest first' and the inclusion of flash rates, plus the optional wall-angle filter. It does not contradict the 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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the tool's output, the second gives usage conditions and the optional filter. 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?

This is a simple read-only tool with one fully documented optional parameter and an output schema. The description covers selection, expected return content, ordering, and the optional filter, so nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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 only parameter, 'angle', is fully documented with examples and the default behavior ('Omit for all angles'). The description merely restates 'Optional wall-angle filter', adding little beyond the schema, so the 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 states a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('the user's send pyramid') with concrete output details: sends per grade, hardest first, and flash rates. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like kilter_get_sends or kilter_get_summary by naming the exact grade-level distribution concept.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when the user asks about their grade pyramid, distribution of grades, flash rate per grade, or how solid they are at a level.' It does not list when-not-to-use or name alternative tools, but the trigger conditions are clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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