nba_stats_call

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the response format (column-oriented JSON with resultSets) and that operations carry default params. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 at 4 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes examples and response format details. Each sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers how to use it, the response structure, and where to find operation details. It is mostly complete but lacks error handling or limit information.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining the operation parameter as a path segment (with examples), query_params as a map for overriding defaults, and path_params as optional. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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's a gateway to the stats.nba.com analytics API with 138 operations, specifying the operation parameter and query_params. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like nba_boxscore, the name and description set it apart as a generic gateway.

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 provides usage instructions: supply an operation and query_params, override only needed fields, and browse operations via nba://stats/operations. It implies when to use but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool recommendations.

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