get_roster

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds that it returns specific player fields and emphasizes 'active' roster, providing value beyond the annotations. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but for a read-only tool with strong annotations, this is sufficient.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, followed by return fields, usage tip, and parameter detail. Every sentence earns its place; 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?

With one required parameter, clear output information, and a hint to obtain the team ID, the description fully covers what is needed to invoke the tool correctly. The output schema exists, so return values are well-defined.

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 schema has no description for team_id (0% coverage), but the description defines it as 'ESPN numeric team ID' and gives an example for Atlanta United FC. This fully compensates for the missing schema description.

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 'Get the active roster for an USL Super League team' with a specific verb and resource, and lists returned player fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_teams and get_standings.

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?

It instructs users to use the team ID returned by get_teams, providing a clear prerequisite and linking to a sibling tool. It implies this is for roster queries, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so a 4.

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