get_tournament_round

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that the operation is read-only, any required permissions, what the response format is, or any side effects. The term 'Get' implies a retrieval, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that.

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 short sentence with no waste, but it is overly terse. It lacks structure and fails to convey necessary details. While conciseness is good, the description is under-specified, not elegantly concise.

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 tool with two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the meaning of parameters, the expected response, or any special considerations. An agent cannot reliably determine how to call this tool correctly without additional context.

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 the schema properties have no descriptions. The description does not explain what url_id or round represent, nor their expected formats or constraints. The agent is left with bare parameter names and types, which is insufficient for correct usage.

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 states a clear action (get) on a specific resource (tournament round) on Chess.com. It is unambiguous about the tool's function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_tournament_round_group, which could be a near-alternative. Still, the verb and resource are specific enough for basic identification.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_tournament_round_group or get_tournament. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate or what distinguishes it from siblings. No exclusions or context are provided.

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