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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the 30-minute refresh cadence, the returned field set, and the is_main marker for the primary classic slate. It does not state pagination or error behavior, but for a read-only discovery call this is solid disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and its returned contents, then the is_main rule, then the call-first directive and refresh cadence. Nearly every clause carries information, though "DraftKings scoring" as a trailing fragment is slightly clipped and redundant with the title.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so explicitly (slate_id, label, games, start time, player count), plus the refresh interval and the is_main convention. This is complete enough to invoke and interpret correctly.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Nothing in the description is needed to explain inputs, and it introduces no parameters that could confuse an agent.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (list the DraftKings NHL slates) and enumerates the returned fields, which clearly distinguishes it from the many sibling list_slates tools (mlb, nfl, mma, wnba). An agent can immediately tell this is the NHL slate-discovery tool.

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?

"Call this first to get a slate_id" gives explicit sequencing guidance, implying downstream NHL tools depend on this output. It stops short of naming a specific alternative (e.g. the optimizer or showdown tools that consume slate_id), so it is clear but not fully routing-capable.

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