Position changes

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent read (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), so the description needn't restate safety. It adds useful data semantics (initial position and each subsequent change), but says nothing about ordering, sampling granularity, or how large result sets are truncated beyond what the schema's limit parameter implies.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word contributes to the purpose statement.

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 output schema, the description should clarify what a record looks like (driver_number, position, timestamp ordering) and how it relates to interval/overtake data. Annotations and full schema coverage make it callable, but an agent must infer the result shape and the distinction from sibling position-related tools.

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% across all 9 parameters, including 'latest' semantics for session_key/meeting_key and the filter allowed-fields list, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description contributes no additional parameter guidance beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.

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 resource (driver position) and scope (initial position plus each change during a session), so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent siblings like get_intervals, get_overtakes, or get_starting_grid, which also concern track order.

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?

There is no indication of when to reach for this tool versus get_intervals, get_overtakes, or get_starting_grid, and no prerequisites are mentioned. The phrase 'during a session' weakly implies a session_key is needed, but nothing explicit routes the agent.

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