search_mlc_players

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that it does substring matching and gives an example slug format. Lacks details on potential side effects, rate limits, or authentication, but for a search tool the behavior is adequately transparent given the context.

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 sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value: first defines the tool's purpose, second provides a concrete example and use context. No wasted words.

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 search tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key usage: how to search (substring), what to search (name/slug), and the follow-up tool. The addition of the Cricksheet initials format is helpful. Minor gap: does not mention what the slugs are used for beyond the next tool.

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?

Schema has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage. The description adds meaning to the 'query' parameter by explaining it does substring matching against name or slug, but does not specify the expected format beyond the example. The 'limit' parameter is already described in schema. With partial coverage, the description partially compensates.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Find', the resource 'MLC player slugs', and the method 'substring match against name or slug'. Distinguishes from sibling tools by specificity to MLC and the example conversion from 'F du Plessis' to 'f-du-plessis'.

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 says 'Use before get_mlc_player_profile', indicating when to invoke this tool. Also provides a formatting hint for Cricsheet initials. However, does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though sibling names imply it's the MLC-specific search.

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