faceit_find_player

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the need for an exact nickname and the output (player_id and basic profile info), but does not cover not-found behavior, error handling, or whether the operation is read-only. These gaps are notable for a tool expected to serve as a prerequisite for others.

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, front-loaded with purpose and output, then usage guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 lookup tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential information: what it does, when to use it, and what it returns. It is slightly incomplete regarding the exact shape of 'basic profile info' and error responses, but sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly as a preliminary step.

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 coverage is 100% with the nickname parameter described as 'Exact FACEIT nickname'. The description repeats 'exact nickname' in prose but adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 explicitly states the tool looks up a FACEIT player by exact nickname to retrieve player_id and basic profile info. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning this as the first step before other player_id-dependent tools.

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 phrase 'Use this first before other tools that require a player_id' gives clear context on when to invoke this tool. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., if player_id is already known), lacking a full exclusion clause.

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