find_game

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether multiple game_ids can be returned, what happens if no match, or any side effects. The behavior for optional team2 (only one team?) is unclear.

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 a single sentence of 10 words, making it concise but under-specified. It conveys the core purpose but sacrifices clarity and completeness, lacking details that could fit without excessive length.

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 the tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description is incomplete. It does not explain match behavior (e.g., exact vs partial, case sensitivity, handling of multiple games on same date) or error conditions. Essential context for correct usage is missing.

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 description mentions 'team matchup' and 'optional date', which maps to team1, team2, and date parameters, but does not specify expected formats for team names or date. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds little beyond the schema, and the optionality of team2 is ambiguous.

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 tool finds a game_id by team matchup and optional date, specifying it accepts team names. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_schedule or get_game_details, which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage when needing a game_id from team names and a date, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_schedule (to find games) or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative tools are mentioned.

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