espn_get_athlete

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the tool 'Get[s] information', which implies a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm it is read-only, nor does it disclose any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 concise (one sentence, 13 words) and immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 three required parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to find the athlete ID, what the response format looks like, or any constraints on parameter values. More context is needed for effective use.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter, so the description adds no additional meaning. It does not explain how to obtain an athlete_id or what valid sport/league codes are, but the schema already handles that minimally.

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 retrieves information about a specific athlete, listing specific content (bio, stats, career history). It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on teams, scoreboards, or sport-specific athlete lookups (e.g., mlb_get_player).

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. For example, it doesn't mention that for team rosters one should use espn_get_team_roster, nor does it specify prerequisites like needing an athlete_id.

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