get_player_by_sleeper_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the ID is converted to string, cannot be empty, and that an error is returned if the player is not found. However, it does not mention permissions, read-only behavior, rate limits, or other operational constraints.

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 front-loaded with its purpose and then structured into Args and Returns. It is mostly efficient, though the return-value explanation partly repeats what the output schema likely covers, and there is some redundancy between 'Returns complete unified player information' and 'Returns: Dict...'.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it documents the parameter fully and summarizes error behavior. It is missing only explicit usage guidance relative to sibling search tools.

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%, so the description must compensate fully. It does: it explains what player_id is, that it is a Sleeper player ID, that it is converted to string, that it cannot be empty, and gives a concrete example.

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 and resource: get unified player data by Sleeper ID. It is clear and distinguishes itself from name-based search by requiring a Sleeper ID, but it does not explicitly name or contrast with sibling tools like search_players_by_name.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_players_by_name. Usage is only implied by the requirement of a Sleeper ID, with no when/when-not conditions or alternative routing.

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