pick_random_marathon

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says selection is random from the catalogue but does not disclose whether the seed makes selection deterministic, how min_weeks_out/max_weeks_out filter the catalogue, or what the tool returns.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves necessary invocation details unaddressed.

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 three parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema-description coverage, the description is not complete enough to invoke correctly. The core purpose is clear, but the filtering and seeding behavior are opaque.

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 does not mention any of the three parameters. It adds no meaning for seed, max_weeks_out, or min_weeks_out, leaving an agent unable to infer their effect.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Pick a marathon at random from the catalogue.' It distinguishes the operation from listing tools through the 'surprise me' framing, though it does not explicitly name list_marathons as the alternative.

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?

The phrase "the 'surprise me' path" implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead, such as list_marathons for deliberate browsing.

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