NBA Player Career Stats

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) already indicate this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it retrieves totals, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like potential performance characteristics or required authentication. Given the strong annotation coverage, a neutral score is appropriate.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it could include a brief note about parameters without harming conciseness.

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 the tool has 3 parameters (including enums) and no output schema, the description should clarify return values and parameter roles. It only mentions 'career and season totals' and 'player id', leaving users unaware of the perMode and leagueId impact on results.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but only implicitly references the playerId parameter. It does not explain the meaning of perMode (e.g., Totals vs PerGame) or leagueId (e.g., '00' for NBA). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's enum names.

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 'Get career and season totals for an NBA player id', specifying the verb (Get) and the resource (career and season totals). It distinguishes from sibling tools like nba_player_game_log (game logs) and nba_player_info (player info), which return different data.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as nba_player_game_log for per-game specifics or nba_player_info for biographical data. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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