entain_racing_meeting

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, signaling a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context by listing the return structure (compounds, domestic_countries, meetings, races, venues) and explicitly stating 'Auth: none needed', which goes beyond the annotations.

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 and front-loaded, with the core function stated in the first sentence. It then provides a return structure, an example, and an auth note—all relevant information with no redundant fluff.

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?

The tool has only two parameters and no output schema, so the description's inclusion of the return structure and auth note compensates well for the missing schema. While it doesn't discuss alternatives, the overall description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how to invoke it.

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 input schema already documents both parameters with clear descriptions ('Race date, YYYY-MM-DD' and 'IANA timezone'), giving 100% coverage. The description's example repeats this information without adding new semantic constraints or format details, so it provides no significant additional parameter meaning 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 tool provides 'All race meetings + races for one date', which is a specific resource (race meetings and races) with a clear scope (one date). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like entain_racing_racecard or entain_racing_search by focusing on the full day's data.

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 when needing a complete set of meetings and races for a single date, as shown in the Melbourne card example. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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