sportsbet_race_preview

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

No annotations provided; the description fully carries the burden. It describes the return format but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The operation is read-only, which is implicit.

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 with two sentences: one for purpose and one for return structure. No unnecessary verbosity.

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 simple data retrieval tool, the description provides the core purpose and return format but lacks parameter details. Given no output schema, the return structure is described, but completeness is moderate.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four required parameters (raceType, trackName, raceNumber, eventDate). While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no additional meaning to compensate.

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 returns an editorial race preview (text + video) for one race, with the return object structure shown. This differentiates it from other sportsbet race-related tools like racecard or best bets.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description only implies it is for getting a preview for a specific race.

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