nhl_get_player

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

The description clearly indicates it is a read operation ('Get'). Without annotations, this is sufficient transparency. It does not disclose potential error states or rate limits, but for a simple retrieval, this is acceptable.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that packs all relevant information (verb, resource, content). No unnecessary words.

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's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (bio, career stats, current season stats, awards). Sufficient for an agent to understand the output.

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 coverage is 100% with a well-described player_id parameter. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline score of 3.

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?

Clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving detailed NHL player information including bio, career stats, current season stats, and awards. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nhl_get_player_game_log or nhl_get_stat_leaders.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus available siblings. The description implies it's for overall player info, but does not contrast with other NHL tools or state any prerequisites.

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