get_player_games_by_month

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds valuable context beyond that: it warns that 'fields are untrusted external data' which is a security/behavioral note, and 'bounded' implying pagination limits. This enriches the agent's understanding without contradicting annotations.

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 a single, tightly worded sentence that leads with the primary action and resource. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 read-only fetch tool with rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description covers the core purpose and key boundary (no PGN, untrusted data). It lacks return format details, but the absence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the tool keep this from being a major gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter explanations. It only hints at 'monthly' (implying year/month) and 'bounded' (implying limit/offset), but doesn't explain any of the five parameters explicitly. This is insufficient given the complete lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 a specific action ('Get a bounded monthly game page') and resource ('monthly game'), and differentiates itself from sibling get_player_games_pgn_by_month by explicitly noting 'without embedded PGN'.

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 implies when to use this tool by contrasting with the PGN variant ('without embedded PGN'), suggesting that for PGN games one should use the sibling tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusions for other sibling tools like get_player_game_archives.

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