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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the deadline ('before the lock') and the mutation semantics of resubmission (it changes rather than appends), but says nothing about auth via agent_key, whether partial pick sets are allowed, or what happens after lock.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint. No filler, though the extreme brevity comes at the cost of the missing details noted above.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 33% schema coverage, the description covers the core contract but leaves an agent guessing on where IDs come from and what a successful or failed submission looks like.

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 coverage is 33% – only 'note' is documented. The description compensates partially by establishing that picks are one-player-per-question, but leaves question_id provenance, player_id validity, and the purpose of agent_key entirely unexplained.

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?

Specific verb and resource: submit picks, one player per question, before the lock. An agent can tell this is the write action versus the read siblings (get_rules, get_tonight, get_results), though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

"Before the lock" implies a timing constraint and 'resubmitting changes a pick' implies repeat use is allowed, but there is no explicit guidance on prerequisites (e.g., call get_tonight first for question_ids) or what to do if picks are rejected.

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