get_psl_player_profile

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

Describes the output: career batting and bowling aggregates across all seasons with phase splits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and adequately discloses the tool's behavior as a read operation returning structured stats.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a clear purpose: purpose, league specification, and usage guidance. No unnecessary words, and critical information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (batting+bowling aggregates, phase splits) and how to use it. It could be more detailed about the exact structure of the output, but it is sufficiently complete for effective use.

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 describes playerSlug as a kebab-case PSL player slug with an example. The description reinforces this and adds context on how to obtain the slug (via search). Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds 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 it retrieves a PSL player's career batting and bowling aggregates with phase splits, and specifies the league (Pakistan Super League only). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_player_profile (likely all leagues) or get_wpl_player_profile (WPL).

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?

Explicitly instructs to use search_psl_players first if the slug is unknown, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool vs. a search tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it compared to other player profile tools, though the league specificity implies context.

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