pl_player

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It describes the output structure (array of spells with fields) but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 reasonably concise and front-loaded with the key concept. The return format is provided, but it could be slightly more structured to separate purpose from output.

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 the simple one-parameter tool, the description gives sufficient context for the output but neglects to clarify the input parameter. Without an output schema, the description's output structure is helpful.

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 one required integer parameter 'pid' with no description. The tool description does not explain what 'pid' represents (e.g., player ID). With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to add meaning for the parameter.

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 'Full player career — one entry per club/season spell', specifying the verb (retrieve) and resource (player career spells). It also lists the returned fields, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like pl_player_basic or pl_player_info that likely provide different scopes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool or when to choose alternatives. The description implies it's for getting career spells, but does not mention limitations or when other player tools might be more appropriate.

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