formulae: Get races

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavior beyond that: the result set is paginated and page-addressable, and the ids are usable as keys in other tools. Rate limits or page-size defaults are not disclosed, so 4.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the resource and returned fields come first, pagination second, downstream routing last. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is the right place to compensate. Pagination is covered, but the page size, whether a total count exists, and the meaning of the result-availability flags are left unexplained.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema; this sets the baseline at 3. The description reinforces `page` as the advancing cursor but says nothing about the `fields` projection parameter, adding only marginal meaning.

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 and resource ('List Formula E races / E-Prix') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, country, city, date, result flags). It also names the sibling tools that consume the output, so an agent can place it precisely in the formulae_* family without opening a schema.

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?

'Paginated — use `page` to advance' tells the agent how to iterate, and 'Each race id feeds formulae_get_race / formulae_get_race_results' establishes this as the entry point that routes downstream. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use condition (e.g., versus formulae_get_championships), so it stops short of 5.

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