player_lookup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses a read-only 'find/return' operation and lists returned data, but it does not clarify edge cases like multiple matches, substring matching semantics, or how the 'season' parameter affects the output.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys input formats, output components, and the data source. Every phrase earns its place, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 lookup tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description gives core input/output details but omits season parameter behavior and return structure specifics. It is adequate but leaves clear gaps that could affect correct invocation.

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 compensate. It adds meaning to name_or_id by listing accepted forms ('name substring or gsis_id'), but the 'season' parameter is only indirectly tied to 'recent season stat lines' and its default or filtering behavior is not explained.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find'), names the resource ('player'), specifies input formats ('name substring or gsis_id'), and enumerates the output ('id bridge, bio, and recent season stat lines'). This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like player_news or coach_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?

The description implies use when a player lookup is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as player_news, nor does it mention when not to use it. No alternative tools are named.

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