Analyze advanced player stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by detailing the sources and types of statistics (e.g., exit velocity, WAR). It does not contradict annotations, but could mention any potential limitations like rate limits or data freshness.

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 two sentences: the first lists the tool's action and data sources concisely, the second gives a clear use case. No unnecessary words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool with 2 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and readOnlyHint annotation, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. However, without an output schema, it could briefly describe the return format (e.g., aggregated stats object) to improve completeness.

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 100% with clear parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Player's full name' with examples). The description does not add new parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, but it does contextualize the parameters by mentioning 'single player' and 'multiple sources.' This meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 it fetches and aggregates advanced statistics for a single player from specific sources (MLB Stats API, Baseball Savant, FanGraphs). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_player_stats' (basic stats) and 'rank_players' (ranking) by focusing on advanced stats and multiple sources.

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 explicitly advises 'Use this before making roster add/drop decisions,' providing clear context for when to use. It implies this tool is for analysis, not execution, which differentiates from sibling 'add_drop_player.' However, it lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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