chess_player

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It gives no details about authentication needs, rate limits, error handling (e.g., for invalid usernames), or response structure. For a simple retrieval, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), which is efficient but too sparse. It front-loads the purpose but omits essential details, making it barely adequate.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity and no output schema, the description should explain what constitutes a 'profile' or any prerequisites. Currently, it leaves the agent with insufficient context to know what to expect from 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?

The sole parameter 'username' lacks any description in the schema (0% coverage) or in the tool description. The agent must infer that it expects a Chess.com username, but the description adds no clarification or constraints.

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 a Chess.com player profile, using specific verb 'Get' and resource 'player profile'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like chess_player_stats and chess_player_games which focus on different data aspects.

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 guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives (e.g., chess_player_games, chess_player_stats). Fails to mention prerequisites or context, leaving the agent without decision criteria for tool selection.

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