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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real value by disclosing the return payload (identity, leagues, roles, time zones, per-league permission plus plain-word reason) and the token's overall write capability. It stops short of format/shape details, which the output schema presumably carries.

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 actionable 'START HERE' imperative and the payload contents, then closes with the alternative routing. It runs a bit long and lists its returns in an embedded clause, but every sentence carries distinct information.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain the return shape, yet it still summarizes what comes back and what the permission fields mean. Combined with annotations covering the read-only profile, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly first.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline for no-params tools applies. The only parameter-like detail is the cross-reference to beleeg_look_up(what: "search_leagues"), which aids routing rather than this tool's inputs.

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 and resource ('tells you who this connection belongs to') with enumerated scope: leagues, league_id, roles, time zones, and change permission with reasons. An agent can immediately distinguish this identity/permission bootstrap from siblings like beleeg_look_up or beleeg_needs_me.

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?

Explicitly says 'START HERE in a new conversation' and gives the discover-by-refusal anti-pattern it replaces. It also names the exact alternative and condition for a different case: 'For a league the person is NOT in, use beleeg_look_up(what: "search_leagues")'.

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