discover_races

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, authorization requirements, or pagination behavior. The existence of an output schema partially mitigates the lack of return value details, but the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the purpose.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and front-loaded with the verb and resource. No extraneous information; 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?

The tool is simple with 2 parameters and an output schema. The description covers the core purpose but omits mentioning that the 'tiers' parameter can filter results. While the schema provides this, a more complete description would note filtering capability.

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% for both parameters (year and tiers), so the schema already documents their meaning. The description does not elaborate on parameters beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 fetches professional cycling races from the PCS calendar for a given year, with a specific verb ('discover') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_race_overview' or 'get_stage_results' which target individual races or details.

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 implies usage for listing races by year, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions. However, the context of sibling tools makes it clear this is for discovery, not detailed views.

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