f1: Get driver results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the description is not required to repeat those. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination behavior, data freshness). It meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 achieve the goal: first sentence declares the function, second gives practical guidance. No fluff. Front-loaded with core action. Every word earns its place.

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 simple retrieval tool without output schema, the description covers what is retrieved (race results) and how to specify the driver and season. It could mention that season defaults to 'current' and that pagination is available via limit/offset, but the schema's descriptions already cover those, so the burden is lower. Essentially complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents all four parameters. The description only reinforces the example values for 'driver_id' (e.g., 'hamilton'), which is already in the schema's description. This adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves 'all race results for a specific driver in a given season', distinguishing it from sibling tools like f1_get_drivers (list drivers) and f1_get_race_results (results for a race). The action verb 'Get' and resource 'driver results' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear guidance on how to specify the driver ('Use driver IDs like ...'). While it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool vs. alternatives, the context of sibling tools (e.g., f1_get_driver_standings for standings) implies appropriate usage. A slightly higher score would benefit from explicit comparisons.

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