get_schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and open-world hints, so the description's burden is reduced. The description adds 'bounded' which hints at pagination or limits, but doesn't explain rate limits, data freshness, or that results may vary per call. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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, very concise. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. It could include critical details while remaining succinct. It doesn't front-load the most important information (e.g., that it returns a list of games).

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 has 5 parameters (1 required) with no schema descriptions, and an output schema exists, the description should at least explain the main use case and the meaning of parameters. It only gives a vague overview. The agent would be left guessing about how to specify team or week, and what the output contains.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only mentions 'season, week, or team' as filters. It fails to explain the season_type (default 'REG'), the limit parameter, that team can be null, or the format of season (integer or string). Parameter semantics are severely lacking.

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 states 'Get bounded NFL games' with filters for season, week, or team, which provides a clear verb and resource. However, 'bounded' is ambiguous (could mean paginated or limited), and it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'get_game' or 'get_game_stats' that also retrieve game data.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling tools. The agent receives no decision support.

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