Wrapped ranges available

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing the exact contents of the returned set (one entry per year with plays, plus a partial current year), which is the key behavioral fact for a zero-argument enumeration tool.

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 sentence with zero waste that front-loads the purpose ('the date ranges get_wrapped can summarise') and then the contents. Nothing 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 no-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description covers what the tool does and what comes back, which is nearly everything an agent needs. It could go one step further by noting the format of the range identifiers consumed by get_wrapped, but the gap is minor.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description usefully explains what the (implicitly returned) range values represent.

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?

Names the specific resource (date ranges) and explicitly ties it to the sibling get_wrapped, so an agent can distinguish it from the other list/search tools without opening any schema. The scope of what is enumerated (each year with plays, plus this year so far) is concrete.

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?

By naming get_wrapped the description implies this is the discovery step before calling that tool, but it never states that explicitly nor gives any when-not guidance or alternatives. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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