player_season

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it excels. It discloses error behavior ('Omitting id returned HTTP 400'), request semantics ('Makes one logical GET request'), pagination behavior ('Does not auto-fetch continuation pages'), filter reliability ('Other declared filters are forwarded as supplied; their effectiveness is not implied'), and response limits with truncation reporting ('Array responses are locally limited to 100 rows and 256 KiB, with truncation reported in text and metadata'). This is comprehensive for a simple read tool.

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 dense but every sentence adds value: it covers purpose, error, endpoint, id sourcing, pagination, filter caveat, and response limits. The main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the rest is efficient. It is not overly verbose given the amount of operational detail an agent needs. A slight reorganization could improve readability, but overall it's well-structured.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It specifies the exact endpoint, the parameter's origin, error conditions, pagination behavior, response limits, and truncation reporting. The only minor gap is a lack of explicit mention of authentication or rate limits, but those may be handled at the tool policy level. Given the tool's simplicity, this is sufficient.

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 a single parameter, 'id', with no description coverage per the signal. However, the description adds substantial meaning: it explains that the id is an explicit identifier for a season record, and instructs the agent on how to obtain one ('obtain a season id from a leaderboard response if needed'). It also notes the consequence of omitting it. This compensates well for the lack of schema-level documentation.

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's function: 'Read one season record by its explicit id, including its end time and reset block value.' This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on players, transactions, markets, etc. It also explicitly disambiguates from the /players/season endpoint, eliminating confusion with a related but different path.

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?

It provides practical guidance on when to use the tool by explaining how to obtain the required id ('obtain a season id from a leaderboard response if needed') and clarifies the correct endpoint path. While it doesn't explicitly enumerate alternative tools or exclusions, the id-source hint and endpoint correction serve as adequate usage context for an agent. The instruction about omitting id returning HTTP 400 further signals the required precondition.

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