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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering mutability and side effects. The description adds that it returns 'availability and freshness' but does not detail what those mean or describe output structure. It meets the bar given annotations but adds limited new behavioral insight.

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, direct and without excess. Every word adds value: action ('return'), scope ('public-data availability and freshness'), and usage context ('preferred first call').

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?

An output schema exists, so return value description is not required. However, the description omits any mention of the two input parameters and does not describe how they affect results (e.g., date optionality, league filtering). For a simple tool, this is a moderate completeness gap.

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%, meaning the description adds no parameter explanations. The two parameters (date, league) are not mentioned despite being enums with clear names. The agent must infer usage from names only, which is a significant gap.

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 returns public-data availability and freshness, and explicitly frames it as the preferred first call for checking league season state or cache freshness. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_league_schedule or get_performance_summary.

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 description explicitly says 'preferred first call when an agent does not know whether a league is in season or whether a requested date has a current cache,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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