mlb: Get schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that it returns games with scores, status, and teams, which is beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or what happens with invalid dates.

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 only two sentences (20 words) and front-loads the core purpose and expected output. Every sentence adds value 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?

Given that all parameters are documented in the schema and annotations cover safety, the description provides adequate context about the return data. However, it could briefly mention that multiple dates can be queried or that teamId filtering is available, especially since these are not obvious from the schema alone.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so the schema already explains each parameter. The tool description mentions 'date or date range' but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema provides. A baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'MLB game schedule'. It specifies the scope (MLB, date/date range) and mentions the returned data (games, scores, status, teams). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling schedule tools for other sports.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mlb_get_game or other sports schedule tools. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or suggest any related tools.

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