get_player

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

No annotations exist, so the description must compensate. It describes output content but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or any other behavioral traits (e.g., authentication, rate limits). It is safe but not fully transparent.

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, dense sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output. It is front-loaded with the main action and lists contents.

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?

With no output schema, the description lists all major output components. For a simple retrieval tool with two well-documented parameters, it is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It does not elaborate on parameter formats or constraints beyond what is in the schema.

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 starts with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full MCSR Ranked profile'), listing detailed content (ELO, rank, tier, stats, links) that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_player_matches or get_player_seasons.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. The description implies this tool is for a comprehensive profile, but it does not state when to prefer it over siblings like get_leaderboard or analyze_player_form.

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