list_drivers

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses data sources (Ergast API vs FastF1), coverage years, return fields, and the note about event requiring year>=2018. This is transparent about behavioral aspects.

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 structured with sections (Args, Returns, Example, Note) and each part adds value. It is somewhat verbose but not wasteful; all sentences contribute to clarity.

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 2 parameters, output schema, and sibling tools, the description is comprehensive. It covers purpose, parameters, return format, example, data sources, and limitation about event filter, leaving no obvious gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains year as season year and event as optional race name or round number. Example shows usage and output, making semantics clear.

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 it lists all drivers in a season, optionally filtered by event, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_driver_info and get_session_results by focusing on driver listing rather than detailed info or session results.

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 when to use with/without event, and mentions data source limitations (1950-present for season, 2018-present for event filter). It does not explicitly list alternatives, but the context of sibling tools and the note about faster response without event gives implicit guidance.

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