get_game_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description adds marginal value. It notes the tool returns 'factual' data and is for a single game ID, which is additional context but does not disclose behaviors like rate limits or pagination beyond limit/default.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and avoids fluff. It is efficient but could be improved by adding brief parameter context without becoming verbose.

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 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no usage guidance, the description is too sparse. It lacks parameter descriptions, error conditions, and connection to sibling tools (e.g., how to obtain a game_id). The presence of an output schema reduces some burden on return values, but overall completeness is low.

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 bears full burden for parameter explanation. However, it only hints at 'player or team' (entity_type) and does not explain game_id, unit, limit, or season. This leaves the agent guessing about required inputs beyond the required game_id.

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 ('box score'), and the scope ('for one canonical game ID'). It also mentions it can be player or team, which aligns with the entity_type parameter, making it distinct from sibling tools like get_game or get_stat_leaders.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention siblings, prerequisites (e.g., knowing the game ID), or cases where other tools like get_stat_leaders or search_players would be more appropriate.

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