get_tracker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any side effects, data freshness, rate limits, or whether the data is from an upstream provider (mentioned in input schema but not in description). The description adds minimal context beyond the schema.

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 very short: one sentence stating the purpose and one additional note. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. However, it could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on what the returned data contains (beyond position and animation frames), any prerequisites, or handling of invalid IDs. The note about football suggests limitations but is vague.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented in the schema. However, the description does not add any additional meaning or usage hints for the parameters (e.g., how to obtain the numeric id, format constraints). Thus, it does not compensate 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves live match tracker data with specific details (position, animation frames) by numeric id. Distinguishes from siblings like get_match_detail (which likely provides different data) and is specific about sport applicability, though 'usually only useful for football' hints at limited scope.

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?

Provides context that the tool is for live tracker data and notes it's mainly for football, implying it may not be useful for other sports. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and alternatives among siblings are not mentioned.

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