get_player_info

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral traits. It only states it accepts name or ID but omits details like authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it works with partial names versus exact matches. No mention of output format or edge cases.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded. It conveys the purpose and parameter flexibility without fluff. Slightly more detail (e.g., 'returns biographical data') would not harm conciseness, but it is efficient.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks context on typical use cases, limitations (e.g., only for active players), or how it differs from related tools like resolve_player_id. It is minimally complete for a simple 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 schema provides only the parameter name 'player' and type 'string' with 0% description coverage. The description adds that it accepts 'player name or ID', clarifying the parameter's acceptable values beyond the raw schema, which is valuable for an agent.

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 returns a player bio/profile, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_player_stats (statistics) or get_player_awards (awards). It also specifies it accepts player name or ID, adding clarity to the scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where it should not be used or recommend other tools for different needs (e.g., searching by partial name vs. exact ID).

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