get_stat_leaders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and not destructive. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but doesn't contradict them. It remains adequate given the annotation richness.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded, but too brief to be useful. It does not earn its place because it omits essential information about parameters and usage.

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 having an output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool with 7 parameters. It does not explain how to rank, what data is returned, or how the ranking works, leaving the agent to infer or guess.

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. But it provides no details on what 'stat', 'unit', 'entity_type', etc., mean. The agent gets no help beyond 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 tool ranks players or teams by a statistic, which is specific and distinguishes it from more general data retrieval siblings like get_schedule or get_team_roster. However, 'one factual statistic' is slightly vague and could be more precise.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., find_stat_seasons or get_game_stats). No mention of limitations, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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