get_race_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that — notably it doesn't say what happens if no race has been set (empty result vs error) or note that data may be external/open-world.

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?

One compact sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the returned content rather than the action, which slightly weakens scanability, but there is no padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so the field enumeration is largely redundant with structured data, and the description leaves out the two things an agent most needs: what happens when no race profile exists and how this differs from set_race_profile. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter semantics to explain and nothing misleading is stated.

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 is a noun-phrase inventory of returned fields (race date, days to go, phase, division, goal, format, station standards) rather than a statement of what the tool does. Combined with the name get_race_profile the intent is inferable, and it implicitly contrasts with set_race_profile, but it never says 'returns the athlete's race profile' explicitly.

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 on when to call this versus get_coach_plan, get_readiness, or set_race_profile. It also doesn't state a precondition such as 'call after a race profile has been configured', which matters given set_race_profile exists as a sibling.

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