get_seasonal_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action ('Get') without detailing traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output format looks like (e.g., statistical categories returned). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely returns complex data.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a basic tool description, though this conciseness comes at the cost of missing contextual details.

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?

Given the complexity of retrieving seasonal statistics (likely involving multiple data points), no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't provide enough information for an agent to understand what statistics are returned, how to interpret parameters, or behavioral constraints, making it inadequate for effective tool use.

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%, meaning parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about parameters beyond implying a 'team_id' is needed. It doesn't explain the meaning of 'year' (e.g., if null defaults to current season) or 'season_type' (e.g., what 'REG' stands for or other possible values), failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('seasonal statistics for a specific team'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'get_player_seasonal_stats' or 'get_seasonal_pitch_metrics', which also retrieve seasonal data but for different entities or metrics.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_player_seasonal_stats' and 'get_seasonal_pitch_metrics' that handle related seasonal data, the description lacks any indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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