betr_race

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns results 'once run', indicating a read-only operation. It also discloses return structure. This adds value beyond what annotations would typically provide.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by return structure. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it returns (racecard data including runners, prices, bet types, results) and that it operates on a single race. It is adequate for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 for the single parameter (eventId) is 0%, so the description should compensate. It implies the parameter by stating 'for one race', but does not explicitly describe it. The parameter is a simple integer, so minimal clarification is needed, but the description could be more explicit.

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 'Full racecard for one race: runners, prices, allowed bet types, results once run.' This specifies the verb (get), resource (racecard for a single race), and scope (full racecard). It distinguishes from siblings like betr_race_form (form) and betr_race_flucs (fluctuations).

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 when to use (to get full racecard for one race) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. However, the context of sibling names provides sufficient differentiation.

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