entain_racing_search

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

Description discloses the return format and optional full-text feature. It implies the tool is read-only but does not explicitly state this or mention any rate limits or auth requirements. With no annotations, the description carries the burden, but it is adequate for a search endpoint.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the return structure. It is concise with no filler, though adding parameter details would improve it without sacrificing brevity.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a basic understanding of functionality and return shape. However, it lacks context on when to use the tool among many racing siblings and does not explain the second parameter, leaving gaps for effective use.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It only mentions 'optional full-text' which likely corresponds to the 'q' parameter, but gives no detail on 'category_ids'. The description does not explain parameter formats, defaults, or behavior beyond the vague mention of full-text.

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?

Description clearly states it performs racing search and returns facets for barrier, country, jockey, trainer. It distinguishes from sibling racing tools by focusing on faceted search results. However, it does not specify the domain entity being searched (e.g., races, horses), leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like entain_racing_meeting or entain_racing_future_markets. The description provides no use cases, exclusions, or mentions of alternative tools.

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