teams_get_athlete_statsFetch career and season statistical totals and averages for an athlete across standard and advanced metrics. Use for sports analytics and performance tracking.
Fetch career and season statistical totals and averages across all standard and advanced metric categories for an athlete.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sport | Yes | ||
| league | Yes | ||
| season | No | ||
| athlete_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine return-shape context by saying the output spans career and season totals/averages across standard and advanced categories, but says nothing about identifier requirements, league/sport coverage, or how missing data is represented.
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 dense sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with no filler. It is efficient, though it spends words enumerating metric categories rather than clarifying usage or parameters.
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?
For a read-only lookup with annotations covering the safety profile, the description is adequate at the purpose level. It falls short on the two things that matter most here: no usage routing against several overlapping stats siblings, and no clarification of the ambiguous optional season parameter.
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% across four parameters. The phrase 'career and season' hints that the optional season parameter selects between career and season views, but the description never states this explicitly, and it gives no guidance on the accepted values or formats for sport, league, or athlete_id.
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 (career/season statistical totals and averages for an athlete) and scopes the metric categories covered. However, it does not differentiate itself from close siblings like teams_get_player_stats or teams_get_athlete_overview, which appear to overlap in the statistics domain.
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 gives no when-to-use guidance and never names an alternative. An agent facing teams_get_player_stats, teams_get_athlete_splits, teams_get_athlete_gamelog, and teams_get_athlete_overview has no basis for choosing this one over the others.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.