faceit_getPlayerHubs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the endpoint, parameters, and return type 'Hubs list' but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or details about pagination behavior beyond the parameters.

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 highly concise: two lines for purpose, then 'Use to list...', endpoint, bullet list of parameters, and return type. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no wasted words.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return type. It could explain what a 'hub' is or handle edge cases, but for a simple retrieval tool it is fairly 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description includes a full Parameters section explaining each parameter: player_id (path, str, required), offset (query, int | None, min 0, max 1000), limit (query, int | None, min 1, max 50). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Retrieve all hubs of a player' and 'Use to list hubs a player belongs to.' The verb 'retrieve/list' and resource 'hubs of a player' are specific and distinct from sibling tools like faceit_getPlayerTeams or faceit_getPlayerTournaments.

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?

The description includes 'Use to list hubs a player belongs to,' which provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives, which would be helpful given the many sibling tools.

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