Get a MaxPreps team roster

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

The description discloses meaningful behavioral traits beyond annotations: soft-deleted entries are excluded by default, rosters may contain more rows than the page shows, and height/weight are null when unpublished. The read-only nature aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation, and the description adds substantial context about data quality and payload size.

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 four sentences, each earning its place. It front-loads the core payload, then adds behavioral caveats and a read-only note. No fluff or redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description covers return fields and null behavior, and explains the soft-deleted nuance. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but for a roster-sized dataset this is acceptable. The parameter schema covers the rest. Overall, it is well-rounded for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the impact of includeDeleted (soft-deleted exclusion default) and reinforcing that 'season' is per-season. It also clarifies that height/weight can be null, which relates to the data returned. This goes beyond the schema 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 the tool retrieves players on a team for one season with specific fields (jersey, name, class year, positions, height, weight). This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and it distinguishes the roster tool from siblings like athlete, schedule, and team tools.

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 context about default behavior (soft-deleted entries excluded) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as maxpreps_get_athlete or maxpreps_get_team. No 'when-not' or alternative tool guidance is given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and purpose.

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