list_races

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List races' only implies a read-only operation and does not mention pagination, filtering behavior, required campaign context, or any other side effects or 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 extremely short and contains no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. A single phrase such as 'List races' does not earn its place because it simply restates the tool name and adds no useful behavioral or contextual information.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the required campaignId parameter, the meaning of page, and what a successful response contains. None of that is present, so the description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool with confidence.

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 explain the parameters, but it does not mention campaignId or page at all. The agent receives no additional meaning beyond what the bare schema property names and types already provide.

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 ('List') and resource ('races'), so the basic action and target are clear. It does not differentiate this tool from the many other sibling list_* tools beyond the resource name, but the resource name itself is sufficient given the sibling set.

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 guidance about when to use list_races versus alternatives such as get_race, search, or other list tools. The context signals and sibling names imply a list-versus-get pattern, but the description does not state it.

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