get_price_changes

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

The description discloses that the result includes risers/fallers with ownership and transfer momentum, and that limit is per direction. However, with no annotations, it does not explicitly state whether authentication is required or how recent the data is, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 compact and well-organized, leading with the primary purpose, then args, then returns. No redundant text.

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 simple two-parameter getter, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return content. It lacks explicit edge-case behavior (e.g., empty lists) but is otherwise complete for the tool's complexity.

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 Args section explains each parameter beyond the schema: direction accepts 'risers' or 'fallers' with a default of both, and limit caps results per direction. This adds meaningful semantics that are absent from the schema's bare property definitions.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves players whose price changed in the current gameweek, separating risers and fallers. This specific verb+resource disambiguates it from sibling tools like get_gameweek_live_scores and get_dream_team.

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?

It provides clear context for use -- querying current-gameweek price changes -- and optional filters for risers/fallers. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, but no other sibling tool serves this exact purpose, so the context is sufficient.

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