faceit_getOrganizerByName

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method (GET) and endpoint (/organizers) and notes the return type, but omits details like authentication, rate limits, or potential errors. For a simple read tool, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 structured into a purpose statement, usage guidance, endpoint, parameters, and return info. It is mostly concise, though 'Use when you only have...' could be slightly tighter. Still efficient and well-organized.

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 lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: purpose, when to use, parameter details, and return type. Missing are error handling or limits, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage. The description adds parameter type (string, query, required) and a brief description ('The name of the organizer'), providing some value beyond the schema title, but could be more explicit (e.g., formatting, case sensitivity).

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 explicitly states 'Retrieve organizer details from name', clearly identifying the verb (retrieve) and resource (organizer details from name). It distinguishes from getOrganizer by specifying name-based vs id-based lookup.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you only have an organizer name string and need the canonical organizer record' and directs to getOrganizer for id-based lookup, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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