get_goalkeeper_match_stats

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read operation by stating it 'get' stats, which is correct. However, it does not mention potential errors (e.g., invalid matchId), rate limits, authorization needs, or output format. This is adequate for a simple tool but lacks completeness.

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 concise: one sentence stating the tool's purpose and one clarification about the parameter. Every word adds value; no redundancy. The structure is front-loaded with key 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?

Given the simple parameter set (one required parameter) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameter format. However, it omits details about the return structure (e.g., format of stats) and error handling, which would be beneficial for agent usage.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for matchId. The description adds value by clarifying that matchId can be a numeric ID or a FotMob URL string, which is beyond the schema's type definition (oneOf integer or string without further context).

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 specifies the tool retrieves goalkeeper-specific stats (saves, shots on target, save percentage, xGOT, goals prevented). The verb 'get' and resource 'goalkeeper_match_stats' are explicit. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_match_stats', reducing clarity for agents deciding between them.

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 description provides useful context that 'matchId may be an ID or FotMob URL', which aids correct parameter input. However, it fails to specify when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., for general match stats vs goalkeeper-specific), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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