get_tournament_round_group

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 says 'Get', which implies a read operation, but it does not mention response format, error behavior, authentication requirements, or what data fields are returned.

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 one short, readable sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than deliberate economy.

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 three-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the description is not complete enough. It fails to explain parameter semantics, the expected return value, or how this tool differs from get_tournament_round, leaving significant gaps for an agent to fill by guessing.

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%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. The agent must infer the roles of url_id, round, and group only from their names; there is no explanation of expected formats, how the parameters combine, or how they relate to a tournament round group.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get a tournament round group'. It communicates the domain (Chess.com) and the object being retrieved served. However, it does not define what a round group is or differentiate it from the closely named sibling get_tournament_round.

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 about when to use this tool instead of get_tournament or get_tournament_round. The intended use is only implied by the tool name and description, with no exclusions, prerequisites, or relationship to neighboring tournament-related tools.

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