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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the nature of the returned content (opening, finals, key dates), which is useful, but says nothing about read-only behavior, auth, rate limits, or whether an omitted month defaults to the current month.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a bracketed scope tag; nothing is wasted. Slightly dense but appropriately sized for a one-parameter list tool.

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 single optional-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description conveys the domain, the grouping key, and what each entry contains. Only minor gaps remain (default month behavior, response shape), which is acceptable at this complexity.

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 100% and the single month parameter is already documented as YYYY-MM in the schema. The description's 依月份 adds only a restatement of that grouping behavior, not format or defaulting semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 (依月份列出 / list by month) and resource (台灣運動賽事日程資料庫) and even names the fields surfaced (開幕、決賽、關鍵日期). An agent can tell this is a month-scoped calendar view, but the description does not differentiate it from close siblings like list_sports_events or whats_on.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are given. The agent must infer that this is the right tool for a monthly overview versus event_countdown or get_sports_event, with nothing in the text to steer that choice.

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