cr_player

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only says 'Get'. It does not mention side effects (none expected), authentication needs (api_key parameter is optional but unexplained), or error handling. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior beyond its basic function.

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, short sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose. However, it could be expanded slightly to improve completeness without sacrificing conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what is returned or the format of the response. For a simple lookup tool, more detail would be expected to enable correct invocation and interpretation.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'by tag', which partially clarifies the playerTag parameter, but the api_key parameter is completely undocumented. The description adds minimal semantics beyond the parameter names.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('a Clash Royale player'), and the method ('by tag'). It is specific and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'cr_top_players', which retrieves a list of top players rather than a single player.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for when this tool is preferred over similar tools like 'cr_top_players'.

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