Query Handigraphs stats

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it queries 'live' data, that pagination remains in the tool, and that describe_resource should be used first, offering behavior beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a key usage directive. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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 17 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter explanations, the description is far too minimal. It does not cover how to construct queries, interpret responses, or handle the complex filter and metrics structures, making it inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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?

The schema has 17 parameters with no descriptions, and the description only mentions cursor for pagination. It doesn't explain the meaning of sport, resource, metrics, filters, or other parameters, leaving the agent to infer from names and schema types.

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 queries one live Handigraphs Stats API resource, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by indicating it's for querying data, while list_resources and describe_resource serve other purposes.

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 instruction to 'Use describe_resource first' provides a clear prerequisite and workflow guidance. Pagination via cursor is noted, implying this tool handles subsequent pages. While alternatives aren't explicitly named, the sibling names imply their distinct roles.

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