search_wpl_players

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes substring matching and case-insensitivity, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior or detail output format (e.g., returns array of slugs). However, the example and typical search semantics make it reasonably clear.

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 with no fluff: purpose, scope, example+guideline. Every sentence adds unique value and 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 simple search tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, usage, and example. Missing explicit return format (e.g., 'returns array of slugs') is a minor gap, but overall adequate.

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 covers both parameters (100% coverage), baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the query parameter matches against 'full name or slug' and giving an example, but does not elaborate on the limit parameter beyond what schema provides.

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 'Find WPL player slugs by substring match against full name or slug', specifying the exact action and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by limiting to Women's Premier League and providing a count of players and seasons.

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_wpl_player_profile' and 'NOT for IPL/MLC/T20WC players', providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, which is particularly helpful given the many sibling search tools.

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