ow_player_get

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior; the description's 'Read' wording is consistent. It adds behavior about reporting private and missing data distinctly, which goes beyond mere annotation.

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?

One concise sentence that front-loads the main action and resource, then adds the key output behavior. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The description communicates the core purpose and a key output nuance, but given six parameters and a view enum, it leaves several operational details unexplained. It is adequate but not fully complete without schema descriptions or an output schema reference.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only loosely implies filtered career/hero/role statistics. It does not explicitly explain mode, platform, view enum semantics, or how filtering interacts with parameters, so parameter meaning is only partially supplemented.

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 reads a public player profile and filtered statistics, and distinguishes it from search-oriented siblings like ow_players_search. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 useful guidance about public data and distinct handling of private/missing fields. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or enumerate when to use this over search tools, but the public/private distinction provides practical usage context.

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