pointsbet_racing_meeting

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

No annotations are provided. Description discloses the return structure but does not mention behavioral traits like read-only nature, idempotency, rate limits, or authentication. Minimal behavioral disclosure beyond output shape.

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 sentences: first states purpose, second shows return shape. No wasted words, front-loaded, and efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by showing the return structure. It covers the main fields but lacks error cases, conditions details, or explicit usage context. Mostly complete for a simple tool.

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 has one required integer parameter 'meetingId' with 0% coverage. Description adds basic meaning by stating 'by id', indicating the parameter is the meeting identifier. It does not explain how to obtain the id or any format constraints.

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 states it retrieves one race meeting by id, including venue, conditions, and full race list. It includes the return shape and distinguishes from siblings like pointsbet_racing_meetings (plural) and pointsbet_racing_race.

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 implies usage when you have a specific meeting id but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling tool names provide implicit distinction but no direct exclusions or alternatives.

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