VGC Helper status

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

The readOnlyHint annotation matches the read-only 'Show' behavior. The description adds the specific status categories, but not extra behavioral details such as network checks or caching. This is acceptable because the output schema and read-only annotation cover the main expectations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence names the action and the exact returned information with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a parameterless, read-only status tool with an output schema, this description is complete. It states the key status dimensions and requires no additional context to invoke safely.

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 no semantic burden on the description. Baseline 4 applies because there are no parameter details an agent could need.

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 uses the verb 'Show' and enumerates exactly what status info is returned (active regulation, calculator version, local database, metagame source freshness). This clearly distinguishes it from replay/calculation/refresh sibling tools.

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 status-oriented wording implies it is used to inspect current state, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over siblings. The description does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

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