Analyze advanced stats for entire roster

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms a read operation. It adds behavioral details like the batch size limit (max 10 per call), parallel execution capability, response including league scoring categories, and the mlbStats.columns naming convention—all beyond what annotations offer.

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 a single dense paragraph of five sentences, packed with information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, but could benefit from bullet points for clarity. No wasted words, though slightly verbose in one sentence.

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 partially explains response structure (mlbStats.columns, standard, recent14d, recent30d) and mentions league scoring categories. It references combining with get_roster. For a tool with 4 optional params and no required, this level of detail is sufficient but could explicitly state the output format.

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 the schema defines parameters adequately. The description adds value by explaining how to use playerKeys (split from get_roster, max 10) and clarifying that playerKeys can be key or full name, which goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 'Fetch advanced stats (Statcast, expected stats, FanGraphs) for a batch of rostered players' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_roster_stats and analyze_player_stats by focusing on batch processing and advanced stats.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'callers should first use get_roster to retrieve all player keys, split them into batches of up to 10, and call this tool once per batch (calls can run in parallel).' It also advises combining with get_roster to see starting/benched players, providing clear direction on when and how to use.

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