lichess_fetch_games

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

No annotations provided; description only says it fetches recent games. It does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what happens if the user doesn't exist. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 a clear subject line and bullet arguments. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it mixes languages (Czech description with English argument names), which slightly reduces clarity.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values, but it does not. It also lacks context about data format, pagination, or limitations. For a tool with moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), this is incomplete.

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%, but the description adds value for all three parameters: username is clarified to accept both Lichess and Chess.com usernames, max_games bound is specified as 1-50, and source options are explicitly listed as 'lichess' or 'chesscom'. This goes beyond the schema's defaults and titles.

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 tool downloads recent games of a player from Lichess or Chess.com. The verb 'stahne' (downloads) and resource 'recent hry hrace' (recent games of a player) are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like lichess_import_pgn or lichess_player_profile.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts, or when not to use it. The description simply states what it does without any usage boundaries.

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