Get a MaxPreps stat leaderboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: rows are returned undecoded with a warning if MaxPreps changes the row shape, preventing mislabeling, and it clarifies the content of each entry (stat line, school, teamPath). This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose/return shape, parameter sourcing guidance, and error-handling behavior. No redundancy or filler.

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, the description effectively covers the return shape (athletes, stat line, school, teamPath), the scope (state or national, up to 200), the source of `path`, and fault behavior. It provides enough context for an agent to select and use the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that `path` should come from `maxpreps_list_stat_categories` and gives an example in the schema, but it adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides for either `path` or `limit`.

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 returns ranked athletes for one statistical category across a state or nationally, with full stat lines and a teamPath. This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and the mention of taking `path` from maxpreps_list_stat_categories distinguishes it from sibling tools that might construct paths or return broader leaderboards.

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?

It explicitly instructs users to take `path` from `maxpreps_list_stat_categories` rather than constructing it, which is clear usage guidance tied to a sibling tool. It does not explicitly contrast with `maxpreps_get_stat_leaders` or other alternatives, so it lacks a full when-not-to-use statement.

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