mlb_seasons_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, has rate limits, or any potential side effects. It only describes the return format, which is helpful but not sufficient for understanding behavior beyond that.

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 composed of two short paragraphs, the first explaining purpose and the second showing return format. It is front-loaded with the most important information and avoids unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more concise by merging the first sentence into a single statement.

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 no output schema, the description does provide the return structure, which is useful. However, it omits any notes about ordering, pagination, or potential size of the result (151+ seasons). The lack of parameter explanations also reduces completeness for a tool that allows filtering by league/division.

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 has three optional parameters (sportId, leagueId, divisionId) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what these parameters do or how to use them, leaving the agent to rely solely on parameter names and defaults. This severely limits effective invocation.

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 that the tool returns every season in MLB history (151+) with key dates, contrasting with plain /seasons which only returns the current season. It also notes that ?all=true is a no-op for the other endpoint, effectively distinguishing the tool from its sibling mlb_seasons.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for historical seasons) versus plain /seasons (for current season). It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternative tools, but the contrast is clear and sufficient for basic selection.

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