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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already declaring safety and external reach, the description adds real behavioral context: a 31-day maximum window, a 200-game result cap, and US Eastern calendar-day semantics. This is meaningful disclosure beyond the annotations, though it omits what happens on the boundary cases (e.g., no start_date supplied).

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 dense sentence that front-loads the date-range mode and follows with the weekly exception and result cap. Every clause carries information; the parenthetical nesting is slightly heavy but not wasteful.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the two input modes, formats, limits, and the 200-game cap. It does not state default behavior when start_date is omitted (end_date defaults to start_date is in schema, but start_date's absence is unaddressed), leaving a minor 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning: the date format, the 31-day constraint, the Eastern-time convention, and the required pairing of season+week for the weekly mode. That exceeds what the schema alone conveys.

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 resource (games/schedule) and lays out two distinct query modes (date range vs. season week). It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling get_events, which an agent could plausibly confuse it with.

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 specifies when the season+week mode applies (NFL and college football only) and the 31-day date-range limit, which is useful routing. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this over get_events or get_live_events, so alternative selection is left to inference.

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