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 the filter surface (season/date/pagination scope) but says nothing about defaults being applied when filters are omitted or the behavioral effect of empty/blank filter values, which the schema only partly implies.

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 dense sentences plus a short routing clause; the core action and the full filter surface are front-loaded with no wasted words.

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 an 18-parameter read tool with a full output schema and annotations, the description enumerates every filter family and points to mlb_discovery for value resolution, which is nearly complete. It stops short of explaining the type groupings' relationship to rows returned or any default behavior, leaving minor gaps.

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%, covering all 18 parameters with defaults, ranges, and allowed values, so the baseline is 3. The description's grouped list ('game, season, team, minimum pitch/result, date, batter/pitcher hand, pitch type, zone, call model, local sort, and pagination') summarizes the parameters but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Fetch) and resource (Baseball Savant Catcher Framing leaderboard rows) plus the six supported table-groupings. It does not differentiate itself from the closely related mlb_statcast_catcher_framing_details sibling, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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 closing line 'Use mlb_discovery for exact values' gives a useful routing hint for resolving filter values, but the description never states when to use this leaderboard tool instead of the framing details sibling or other statcast tools, and offers no exclusions.

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