player_career_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does it well by specifying the exact return shape: regular-season and playoff career averages plus a season-by-season regular-season breakdown. It does not discuss edge cases such as invalid player_id, but for a simple stats-retrieval tool this is a minor gap.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the tool's purpose and uses the second sentence to add both the id source and the returned data structure.

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 a single required parameter and an output schema present, the description provides sufficient context: what data is returned, what categories are included, and where the required id comes from. No critical information for calling the tool correctly is missing.

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 provides only minimal information for player_id as an integer, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explaining that player_id should be obtained from find_player, which adds real semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool as returning career and per-season statistics for a player, including both regular-season and playoff career averages. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool to differentiate from, but the player-specific scope is clear and distinct from the other listed tools.

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 a valuable prerequisite by telling the agent to get player_id from find_player. However, it does not state when this tool should be chosen over stat_leaders, game_boxscore, or other siblings, leaving some selection logic to inference.

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