Search published rackets using literal, case-insensitive catalogue filters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | score_desc | |
| year | No | ||
| brand | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| audience | No | ||
| max_score | No | ||
| min_score | No | ||
| snapshot_version | No | ||
| editorial_player_level_tag | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool | Yes | ||
| result | Yes | ||
| dataset | Yes | ||
| warnings | Yes | ||
| citations | Yes | ||
| schema_version | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / limit / maximumAdded value: +25Input schema / properties / limit / minimumAdded value: +1Input schema / properties / max_score / anyOfPrevious value: -[
- {
- "type": "number"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]New value: +[
+ {
+ "maximum": 100,
+ "minimum": 0,
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / min_score / anyOfPrevious value: -[
- {
- "type": "number"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]New value: +[
+ {
+ "maximum": 100,
+ "minimum": 0,
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / offset / maximumAdded value: +9007199254740991Input schema / properties / offset / minimumAdded value: +0Input schema / properties / snapshot_versionAdded value: +{
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "default": null,
+ "title": "Snapshot Version"
+}Input schema / properties / year / anyOfPrevious value: -[
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]New value: +[
+ {
+ "maximum": 2200,
+ "minimum": 1900,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+]Output schema / $defs / OfferPrice / properties / amount / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "number"
- }
-]Output schema / $defs / OfferPrice / properties / amount / exclusiveMinimumAdded value: +0Output schema / $defs / OfferPrice / properties / amount / typeAdded value: +"number"Output schema / $defs / AffiliateOffer / properties / retailer / enumPrevious value: -[
- "Amazon",
- "Padel Market",
- "PadelDogs",
- "Tennis Point",
- "Racketshop.com"
-]New value: +[
+ "Amazon",
+ "Padel Market",
+ "PadelDogs",
+ "Tennis Point",
+ "Racketshop.com",
+ "SPORTLET"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond the schema: filters are literal and case-insensitive, and only published rackets are searchable. This helps set expectations about matching semantics.
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 focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds the two most important behavioral qualifiers: literal and case-insensitive filtering.
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 read-only search tool with a rich input schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the scope ('published rackets') and matching behavior ('literal, case-insensitive'), while remaining concise; the parameter schema carries the rest of the invocation detail.
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 0% for 11 parameters, so the description must compensate, but it only offers the generic phrase 'literal, case-insensitive catalogue filters.' It adds some shared meaning across filters but does not explain individual parameters such as query, sort, score bounds, or snapshot_version. The burden is largely left to the schema field names and constraints.
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 ('Search') and a clear resource ('published rackets'), and the phrase 'catalogue filters' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_racket, list_racket_brands, and compare_rackets. An agent can tell immediately that this tool searches the catalogue rather than retrieving, listing, or comparing.
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 the tool: searching published rackets with filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the verb 'search' and resource scope give enough guidance for an agent to use it appropriately among the listed siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.