List probable starting pitchers for a date

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds value by specifying the data source (MLB Stats only) and clarifying what is excluded (Yahoo ownership/availability), plus listing the output fields. No contradictions noted.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the main purpose and add only necessary caveats. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple single-parameter list tool with a readOnly annotation, the description is complete: it states the output fields, the data source, and the important caveat about Yahoo data. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently covers the return context.

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 100% coverage with the date parameter described as 'Date as YYYY-MM-DD; defaults to today.' The description does not add further parameter detail, so it meets the baseline but provides no extra value beyond the schema.

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 every probable starting pitcher across MLB for a date, with opponent, home/away, and game time. This is a specific verb + resource + scope, and it distinguishes itself from the sibling fantasy tools by focusing on MLB stats rather than fantasy preferences or analysis.

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?

It explicitly says 'This tool uses MLB Stats only' and instructs to read Yahoo ownership/availability separately from the signed-in Yahoo browser, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context. However, it does not name a specific alternative sibling tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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