mlb_transactions

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

Annotations already indicate read-only/idempotent behavior. Description adds the specific transaction categories covered and the exact return object structure, plus auth requirement. It does not mention pagination or default ranges, but with openWorldHint the bar is lower.

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?

Two short paragraphs: first states purpose and filters, second gives return shape and auth. Zero filler, information is front-loaded and scannable.

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 simple read-only query tool with six optional params and no output schema, it provides purpose, return format, auth status, and filter semantics. Sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly without further context.

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 covers all six parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description restates filtering by team/player/date but adds no syntax or relationship details beyond schema, which already notes startDate must accompany endDate.

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 identifies tool as retrieving MLB roster transactions, listing concrete examples (signings, trades, call-ups, IL moves, DFA). It also states filter dimensions (team, player, date), distinguishing it from sibling tools like mlb_teams or mlb_schedule.

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?

Description specifies filter options (by team, player, single date, or range) and notes authentication is not needed, giving clear context for invocation. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the scope is well-defined.

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