mlb_team_stats

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does disclose the accepted group values, but it does not describe the return format, whether season is optional (though the schema shows it is), or any other behavioral detail like data granularity or error conditions.

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 compact at two sentences, with the main action front-loaded. Every sentence provides useful, non-redundant information without filler.

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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description gives the essentials (one team, season, groups) but lacks a note on what the returned statistics look like (e.g., a list of stat categories). Given the existence of multiple MLB sibling tools, a bit more context on output shape or typical use cases would improve completeness.

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 already describes all parameters (100% coverage), providing a baseline of 3. The description adds specific valid values for 'group' (hitting, pitching, fielding), which is more informative than the schema's generic 'Statistics group'. Other parameters are not enhanced 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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('MLB team season statistics'), and further clarifies it returns one team's statistics. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mlb_league_stats or mlb_player_stats by the 'one team' 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?

The description implies usage for fetching a specific team's season stats but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as mlb_league_stats or mlb_player_stats. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided.

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