mlb_attendance

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent behavior; the description adds 'Auth: none needed' and a detailed return shape, providing useful context beyond the structured metadata. No contradiction with annotations was found.

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?

Three concise sentences cover purpose, return shape, and authentication, with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides the return shape and auth requirement, covering essential details for a simple read-only tool. It doesn't explore parameter interaction edge cases, but those are documented in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description echoes the team/league/season scope but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema already documents. It marginally reinforces the meaning of teamId and leagueId.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving attendance figures for a team or league/season, including per-game and aggregate home/away/total gate data. This specific verb+resource phrasing distinguishes it from sibling tools like mlb_schedule or mlb_teams, which serve different data needs.

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 the tool is for attendance lookups but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. Since no sibling tool directly targets attendance, the context is somewhat implied rather than clearly differentiated.

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