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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds that the tool is free and reports upcoming-match availability, but it does not describe the return shape or pagination.

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 core information is front-loaded: sports available, upcoming-match flag, and free. The routing list is long and dense, but it earns its place by directing agents to sport-specific tools.

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 zero-parameter discovery tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states the resource, the availability flag, cost, and where to go for detailed sport-specific data. A little more return-format clarity would make it fully complete.

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 has zero parameters, which sets the baseline at 4. The description adds no parameter semantics because there are no inputs to explain.

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 identifies the resource and scope: sports available, each with an upcoming-matches flag. It is not written as an explicit verb phrase and does not differentiate from every sibling, but the routing notes for several sports make its role clear.

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?

It gives useful context by naming specialized alternatives for horse racing, MMA, golf, snooker/darts, and boxing. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or cover all sibling alternatives such as find_leagues, find_teams, or get_matches.

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