list_races

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, requires permissions, or has rate limits. The underlying behavior is implied to be safe (listing), but this is not explicitly confirmed.

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 one concise sentence followed by a compact Args block. Every word is necessary, and the key action and scope are front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and the single parameter. An output schema exists, so the return format is not required. However, it does not mention any prerequisites or edge cases, but for a straightforward listing tool, this is adequate.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by documenting the 'year' parameter with an allowed range (2018-2026). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's integer type. No additional details like format or examples are given.

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 lists 'all races and sessions for a season with dates and session paths,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings that focus on individual race details or live data.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_seasons' or other race-specific tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, filters, or contexts where another tool would be more appropriate.

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