sportsbet_racecard_with_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds useful context: the return structure ({event, markets, meeting, context}), an example call, and 'Auth: none needed.' This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand expected behavior, though it does not cover rate limits or detailed error semantics.

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 and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by a return skeleton, example, and auth note. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 there is no output schema, the description compensates by providing a return structure skeleton (event, markets, meeting, context) and an example. It is adequate for a simple lookup tool, though it could mention how eventId/classId are obtained or what 'context' contains.

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% with descriptions for both eventId and classId. The description adds an example but no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the tool provides 'Racecard plus surrounding context (meeting, results, related markets) for one race.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope that distinguishes it from sibling tools like sportsbet_racecard, which likely returns only the racecard without context.

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 a single race needing context, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like sportsbet_racecard or sportsbet_multiple_racecards. There is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling to prefer for other scenarios.

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