Analyze race performance by post position to identify inner and outer track biases. Filter by venue and distance to reveal course-specific tendencies.
枠番（1〜8枠）別の成績を分析
内枠・外枠の有利不利を調べられます。 競馬場や距離でフィルタリングすると、コース特性が見えます。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| venue | No | ||
| distance | No | ||
| year_from | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond stating it analyzes and filters. It does not mention if it is read-only, required permissions, rate limits, or output format, leaving significant gaps.
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 concise with two short sentences. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence. While structured, it could include more details without being 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?
For a tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides adequate context for basic usage but lacks details on output format, parameter combinations, and edge cases.
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%. The description mentions venue and distance in context of filtering, but does not explain the year_from parameter. It adds minimal meaning beyond the schema names and types.
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 it analyzes results by frame number (1-8) and examines inner/outer frame advantages. It is specific about the resource (frame stats) but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like jockey_stats or horse_history.
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 implies usage for investigating course characteristics by filtering venue and distance, but it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention of alternative tools. No exclusions or conditions provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.