mlb_live_feed

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only warns about the large payload. It does not disclose authentication, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only, which is minimal for a data retrieval 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?

The description is concise with two sentences and a return type line. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though parameter details are missing.

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 description details the return structure but lacks parameter explanations and usage guidance compared to the many MLB sibling tools. It is adequate but has gaps.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'hydrate' or 'timecode' parameters. 'gamePk' is implied but not explicitly defined as the game identifier.

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 the complete live game feed with two major sections (gameData and liveData), listing specific fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mlb_boxscore or mlb_linescore, which are subsets.

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 it is the comprehensive feed ('the firehose; large') and suggests alternatives for specific data, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools or provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance.

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