personal_record

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. For a tool that likely reads data, the minimal description fails to clarify its behavior beyond the return value.

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 very short and concise, consisting of a single noun phrase. It conveys the essential purpose without extraneous text. While it could be structured as a full sentence, it is not wasteful for a simple tool with no parameters.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is minimally complete. However, it does not specify what distances are included or whether it covers all sports. An agent might need to infer from the output schema, but the description alone is slightly ambiguous.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning, but it could have explained the scope of distances or sports. It is adequate for a parameterless tool.

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 provides personal records (best times for each distance). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'race_predictions' (which predicts future times) and 'activities' (which lists general activity data). However, it lacks a verb like 'retrieve' or 'get', which slightly reduces clarity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify if it returns all-time bests, seasonal records, or records for a specific sport. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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