get_nba_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the default behavior (defaults to today) and return format, but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or mention error handling for invalid dates. This is adequate but not rich.

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 concise, using two short sentences and a clear Args/Returns structure. Every line adds value without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given the low complexity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior. It states the return type as a list of game dictionaries, which is enough for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 schema provides only the type and default for the date parameter without any description. The tool description compensates by specifying the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and the default behavior (defaults to today), adding meaningful semantics 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 gets NBA schedules for a specific date, using the verb 'Get' with a specific resource ('NBA schedule'). It is distinct from siblings like get_league_teams, get_matchups, etc., which focus on different data types.

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 implies usage for retrieving schedule data for a given date, with an optional date parameter. It does not explicitly provide alternative tools or exclude cases, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over sibling tools.

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