get_player_fielding_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Returns stat lines with splits' but does not disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, or rate limits. The behavioral disclosure is minimal but not contradictory.

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; no unnecessary words. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficient in providing additional context.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers defaults, league filtering, and the effect of omitting parameters. It does not detail the output structure beyond 'stat lines with splits', which is acceptable for a retrieval 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the description adds value by explaining default behavior and the effect of omitting parameters ('Omit all params to get all players for all seasons'). This goes beyond what the 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 the action ('Retrieve'), the resource ('player fielding statistics'), and the context ('by position'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_player_batting_stats and get_player_pitching_stats by specifying 'fielding'.

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 explains default behavior (top-level leagues) and how to override with 'lid', and notes that omitting all parameters returns all players for all seasons. This provides clear usage context, though it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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