Get details on a specific Formula 1 event by year and round, with human-readable or structured output.
Retrieve information about a specific Formula 1 event.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No | The season year | |
| round | No | The race round number or name | |
| format | No | Output format ('human' for readable text, 'LLM' for structured data) | human |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read operation via 'Retrieve' but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, return format behavior (despite a format parameter), or what happens when optional parameters are omitted.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. While concise, it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but it meets the conciseness goal effectively.
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?
The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what information is returned and how the format parameter affects output. It fails to do so, leaving the agent without crucial context for calling the tool correctly.
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 all three parameters (year, round, format) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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 states a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (Formula 1 event information), making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like get_session_results or get_season_calendar, which also retrieve event-related data.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or the sibling tools that might serve similar needs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.