sportmicro_get_player_projections_week

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about what is returned, whether the data is current or historical, or any freshness/rate constraints. Only the word 'Get' hints that this is a read operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no padding, which is appropriate for a no-arg read tool. The word 'documented' is the only element that fails to earn its place.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and three closely related projection siblings, the description is too thin to tell an agent what distinguishes the weekly view or what it receives back. It leaves the core selection question unresolved.

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 tool takes zero parameters (schema is an open object with additionalProperties true), so there is nothing for the description to document and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter ambiguity is introduced.

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 phrase 'Get ... weekly player projections' gives a clear verb and resource, and 'weekly' implicitly separates it from sportmicro_get_player_projections_season. However, it never explicitly states the distinction, and the odd qualifier 'documented' adds noise rather than precision.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the near-identical siblings sportmicro_get_player_projections and sportmicro_get_player_projections_season. The agent must infer the weekly/season split purely from the name.

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