ufc_search_athletes

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds context beyond annotations: no auth needed, the exact response shape, and the instruction to keep both the uuid and fightmetric_id for downstream lookups. This is useful behavioral disclosure, though it omits potential edge cases or error behavior.

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 well-structured with clear sections: purpose, return format, example, and auth. Every sentence adds value, including the return schema guidance and example, with no fluff or repetition.

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 fully explains the return structure and advises on how to use the returned IDs. It covers auth, provides an example, and disambiguates from sibling tools. For a read-only search tool, this is complete and actionable.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example (searching by surname 'Adesanya') and reinforces the operator default ('CONTAINS is the useful default'), which goes beyond the schema's generic parameter descriptions.

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 specifies a clear verb and resource ('Find fighters by partial name') and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by stating 'Start here — every other athlete tool needs an exact title or an id.' This gives the agent an unambiguous understanding of the tool's unique role.

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?

It provides explicit 'when to use' guidance via 'Start here' and explains the alternative (other athlete tools require exact title or id). The example search and auth note further clarify practical usage.

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