pointsbet_racing_meetings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states it returns meetings and races, with no mention of read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or constraints like maximum date window. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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: one sentence for purpose, one for return structure, one example. No wasted words, information is front-loaded with the most critical detail first. Ideal length.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic functionality and return format. However, it lacks parameter format details, error cases, or any usage constraints, leaving gaps for agents unfamiliar with PointsBet APIs.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions). The description mentions 'date window' but does not specify format (e.g., YYYY-MM-DD), range limits, or default values. With two required parameters, the lack of parameter details forces agents to guess the correct input format.

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 retrieves all race meetings for a date window with nested races, and distinguishes from sibling tools like pointsbet_racing_meeting (singular) and pointsbet_racing_races. The verb 'All' and inclusion of return structure make purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for date-window queries but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor provide when-not-to-use guidance. The example 'All meetings for one day' offers context but no explicit exclusions.

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