Get Market Player

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it says almost nothing behavioral. It implies a read operation via 'Details of' and discloses that offers are included, but it never states what happens if the player is not on the market, what accessing another club's player entails, or any permission/pagination considerations.

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?

One efficient, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is arguably over-trimmed for a two-parameter tool, but nothing in it is wasteful.

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?

The output schema means return values need no explanation, but for a lookup tool with a required id and an unexplained optional league_id and no annotations, the description leaves key gaps: which league context the id lives in and how this differs from the many neighboring player/market tools.

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 both parameters are undocumented anywhere, and the description does not compensate at all. It never mentions player_id, and the optional league_id — whose scoping role is ambiguous — is completely unexplained.

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 single sentence gives a specific verb ('Details of') and resource ('one market player') and adds the notable payload detail that offers made so far are included. It is clear what the tool returns, though it never contrasts itself with close siblings such as get_player_profile, get_market, or search_players.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool instead of get_market (browsing the market), get_player_profile (general player info), or scout_player, despite a crowded sibling list where the distinction matters. The only implicit cue is 'one market player', which requires the agent to infer a lookup-by-id use case.

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