get_historical_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It states 'Get finished events' implying read-only, but fails to disclose any side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or data freshness. For a query tool, more behavioral context is expected.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, front-loaded with key information. No redundant text. Each phrase earns its place.

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?

The tool has 4 required parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain the return format (e.g., list of events), pagination, or any filtering beyond sport/league/date range. For a simple query tool, it's minimally adequate but lacks detail about output.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds value by specifying the 'max 31-day span' constraint not present in the schema, which helps agents construct valid queries.

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?

Description clearly states the verb (Get), resource (finished events), and constraints (sport, league, date range, max 31-day span). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_events (likely ongoing) and get_live_events.

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 mentions the 31-day max span but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like get_historical_odds or get_events. An agent would need to infer usage from the name and constraints.

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