get_player_events

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: default ±30 days range and pagination via after_id. Annotations already indicate safe read-only operation, so the description enriches understanding without contradiction.

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?

Three concise sentences with zero waste: first states core purpose, second details default behavior, third gives prerequisite. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 description covers essential behavior (list player events, pagination, default dates) and prerequisite. With output schema existing, return format is handled elsewhere. Could mention ordering or that status filter is optional, but not critical.

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 description adds value beyond the 100% schema coverage by explaining default date range behavior and instructing to use search_players for player_id. This clarifies parameter usage beyond schema descriptions.

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 lists a player's events (schedule/results) with pagination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_events (global) and get_event (single) by specifying player-specific filtering.

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 advises resolving player_id via search_players first, which is a crucial prerequisite. It also mentions default date range behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like query_events.

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