Games Get Game Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that data includes live win probability and in-game injuries, implying fresh content, but does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, caching, or pagination behavior.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The content list is dense but every item is informative, though the sentence is slightly run-on.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description usefully enumerates the returned sections. Annotations cover the safety profile, and the three-parameter input is simple. It lacks guidance on obtaining or formatting event_id and omits when-to-use context, but is otherwise sufficient to invoke.

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 67% and the description only echoes 'event ID'; it adds no format, acceptable values, or relationship among sport, league, and event_id beyond what the schema already provides. It does not compensate for the undocumented event_id parameter or clarify dependencies between parameters.

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?

States a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('comprehensive game summary') for an event ID. The enumerated contents (betting lines, matchup predictor, win probability, injuries) make clear this is the aggregate endpoint rather than narrower siblings such as games_get_event_odds or games_get_win_probabilities.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative-naming guidance is provided. However, the word 'comprehensive' and the list of included sections imply the tool is for a one-stop game overview rather than individual specialized endpoints.

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