betr_grouped_racecard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any rate limits, authentication needs, or potential side effects. The return structure is shown but behavioral traits are missing.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. However, the return structure example is somewhat cluttered with brackets and commas, but overall it is efficient with two sentences and a code-like sample.

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 complexity of the output (grouped by code with event details), the description provides a return structure but does not explain fields like EventId, Venue, or time zone. No output schema exists, and edge cases (e.g., no races) are not addressed.

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 only parameter, DaysToRace, is entirely unexplained in the description. The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not clarify its meaning (e.g., negative for past, positive for future) beyond a vague example. This is a critical gap.

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 it returns all meetings and races for a day offset, grouped by code. It provides an example return structure, making the purpose understandable. However, it could more explicitly differentiate from siblings like betr_todays_races.

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 a broad overview of racing for a day via the example 'Today's meetings', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like betr_todays_races or betr_race. No when-not-to or prerequisites are mentioned.

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