Retrieve per-stint telemetry metrics and degradation slopes for a race, optionally filtered by driver, to analyze stint performance. Custom plan required.
Get per-stint telemetry metrics and degradation slopes. Requires a Custom plan (not included in Developer).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| raceId | Yes | ||
| driverId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that a Custom plan is required, and the verb 'Get' implies a read operation, but it does not describe permissions, scope, response behavior, or any other operational traits beyond that.
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 two short sentences with no wasted wording. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the plan requirement is stated compactly afterward.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is too sparse for an agent to invoke the tool confidently. It should clarify the parameters, filtering behavior, and at least minimal return context for a telemetry endpoint.
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%, and the description does not mention the required raceId or optional driverId parameters. It adds no meaning about whether driverId filters results, whether results are grouped by driver and stint, or what format the identifiers take.
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 states a specific verb and resource: get per-stint telemetry metrics and degradation slopes. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling telemetry tools such as get_race_telemetry_laps or get_telemetry_lap_comparison.
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 only usage constraint mentioned is the Custom plan requirement, which is an eligibility prerequisite rather than guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. It gives no indication of when to use per-stint telemetry versus lap-level or comparison telemetry tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.