faceit_getPlayerLifetimeStats

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

No annotations are provided. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the purpose: it mentions the endpoint path and that it returns stats, but does not disclose potential traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. Given the absence of annotations, the description should carry more burden but fails to do so.

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 concise with three clear sentences and a structured parameter list. It front-loads the purpose and provides usage guidance without unnecessary 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and usage context with a sibling tool. However, it lacks details about the return structure or output fields, which would be helpful given there is no output schema.

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%, so the description must add meaning. However, it only restates parameter names, types, and requirement from the schema, with vague descriptions like 'A game on FACEIT'. It does not explain how to obtain valid values or provide examples.

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 it retrieves lifetime aggregate statistics for a player in a specific game, listing examples like overall K/D, win rate, map-level totals. It distinguishes from the sibling tool getPlayerRecentMatchStats.

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?

Explicitly recommends use for aggregated lifetime stats and directs to getPlayerRecentMatchStats for per-match stats, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to guidance.

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