get_team

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, and open world. The description adds valuable details about returned fields (location, website, motto, rookie year, etc.) beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, 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?

Despite no output schema, the description enumerates return fields comprehensively. Perfectly adequate for a read tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to add much. It provides concrete examples (e.g., 'frc86') which adds practical value.

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 the full profile of a single FRC team by key, and explicitly differentiates from siblings like get_team_simple and get_teams_keys.

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?

Describes specific use cases (in-depth lookups, scouting research, team profile pages) and provides explicit alternatives for lighter responses.

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