get_driver

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It establishes that this is a read of profile data and adds the non-obvious access fact that it works on every subscription tier, but it says nothing about missing-driver behavior, freshness of stats, or response shape.

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?

Two short sentences with the core capability front-loaded and the plan-availability caveat appended. Nothing is padded or redundant.

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 one-parameter read with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what is returned at a summary level (career stat categories), which is the main gap. Minor missing detail on error/empty cases keeps it from a 5.

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% and the single driverId parameter even includes a concrete slug example ('max_verstappen'), so the schema does all the work. The description adds no format or lookup guidance beyond it, which is the expected baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a driver profile') and enumerates the payload ('career statistics: wins, podiums, poles, championships'), which implicitly separates it from list_drivers and get_driver_results. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

'Available on every plan' tells the agent about tier gating but not when to pick this over get_driver_results, get_driver_standings, or list_drivers. Usage is implied by the word 'profile' but no exclusion or alternative is given.

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