nbl_player_stats

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, and the description adds context by specifying the return structure ({type, count, data:[...]}), the exact fields, and that no auth is needed. This goes beyond the annotations, although it does not cover edge cases like empty data or season scope.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, uses a clear list of stats, and includes a compact return shape. Every sentence serves a purpose: the purpose, the parameter source, the return structure, and auth. No unnecessary words.

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 single-parameter read-only tool, the description covers the purpose, parameter origin, return fields, and auth. It does not specify which season (current or a particular season) or pagination, but the given return structure and simple interface make it sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema's playerId description includes 'Player id (UUID) — from nbl_players[].player.id'. The description repeats this source ('playerId is the player UUID from nbl_players') but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool returns season statistics for one player, listing specific data points (points, rebounds, assists, blocks, steals, turnovers, shooting splits, fouls, minutes). It clearly differentiates from siblings like nbl_player_boxscores by specifying 'season statistics' rather than per-game box scores.

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 gives clear context: use this for a single player's season stats, and it tells the agent to obtain playerId from nbl_players. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like nbl_player_boxscores or nbl_stat_leaders, but the phrase 'for one player' plus the data list implies the appropriate use case.

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