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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default range (7 days) and timezone (Taiwan time), which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only, nor does it describe the return format, pagination, or any rate limits. These omissions are significant for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the database name and then states the core behavior. It is concise with no wasted words, and the key information (default range, timezone) is included efficiently.

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 simple listing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and defaults adequately. However, it does not explain what 'important dates' includes or what the return structure looks like. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, more context about the response could be helpful.

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 50%: the 'date' parameter has a format hint (YYYY-MM-DD) but 'days' has no schema description. The description compensates by clarifying that 'days' defaults to 7 and that the date range is interpreted in Taiwan time. It implies 'date' is the start date and 'days' is the range length, adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema.

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 the tool lists ongoing sports events and important dates within a date range from the Taiwan sports event schedule database. It specifies the default range (7 days from today, Taiwan time), making the purpose concrete. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like sports__sports_calendar or sports__list_sports_events.

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?

Usage is implied: to see what sports events are happening in the near future. The default range and timezone provide some context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sports__event_countdown or sports__sports_calendar. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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