seatgeek_performer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly says this is a direct id lookup and enumerates the returned fields: name, type, image, popularity, home venue id, upcoming-event counts, and category taxonomy. It does not mention error behavior or rate limits, but for a simple one-parameter read lookup the core behavior is well disclosed.

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 three focused sentences with no filler. The core verb and resource are front-loaded, and the following sentences add return-field detail and usage guidance. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary, but every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description is quite complete: it identifies the input, explains where the input originates, lists the expected return fields, and routes the agent to the search alternative when needed. It does not mention edge cases like invalid or unknown ids, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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 the schema already documents the id parameter. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining that the id is SeatGeek's own numeric performer id and that it is obtained from a search result. This helps the agent know where the id comes from and what form it takes.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get a SeatGeek performer's detail.' It also clarifies what counts as a performer (sports team, artist, or show) and distinguishes this direct-id lookup from search. This makes the tool's purpose immediately unambiguous against siblings like seatgeek_search and seatgeek_performer_events.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: when you already have a bare performer id and want to skip a search round-trip. It also names the alternative, seatgeek-search, and notes that it returns the same fields for a query. This gives an agent clear decision criteria without needing to inspect other tools.

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