get_stage_results

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the operation type (get), but omits details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error behavior, or what happens with invalid URLs.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's functionality without any redundant language. Every word serves a purpose.

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 (one parameter, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It explains the input format but could briefly mention what 'metadata' includes. However, the output schema likely covers that, so this is a minor gap.

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 schema covers the single parameter with description, and the tool description adds value by providing concrete examples ('race/tour-de-france/2025/stage-1' and 'race/milano-sanremo/2025/result'), clarifying differences between stage and one-day races 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 the tool retrieves results and metadata for a stage or one-day race. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('results and metadata'), and the context of sibling tools like 'discover_races' and 'get_race_overview' differentiates its purpose.

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 when to use the tool (when needing results for a stage or one-day race) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. No direct mention of alternatives among siblings is provided.

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