get_race_predictions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main behavioral difference (latest vs historical) and hints at the aggregation type (daily/monthly). However, it does not cover potential edge cases (e.g., invalid dates, rate limits) or side effects. The description is adequate but not detailed.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is succinct. Every sentence serves a clear function.

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 retrieval tool with three parameters and no nested objects or output schema, the description covers the key usage patterns. It could mention expected output format (e.g., predictions per distance), but that is not critical given the tool's straightforward nature. Overall, it is complete enough.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by rephrasing the usage pattern ('Omit dates for latest'), but it does not provide new semantic details beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the tool retrieves race time predictions for specific distances (5K, 10K, half marathon, marathon). It differentiates between getting the latest prediction and historical data by date, which helps the agent understand distinct usage. Among many sibling get_* tools, this is unique and unambiguous.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to omit or provide dates: 'Omit dates for latest. Provide dates for historical (daily/monthly)'. This effectively tells the agent when to use each parameter combination. While it doesn't mention alternatives or exclusions, the guidance is clear enough for most use cases.

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