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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context: availability is time-sensitive and only included while it passes accuracy checks. It could go further by explaining freshness cadence or result behavior.

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 compact sentence with no wasted words. The core resource is front-loaded and the accuracy-check caveat is appropriately parenthetical.

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 no-parameter list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description sufficiently says what is returned and why availability changes. It could better relate itself to sibling Storylines tools and hint at the result shape.

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, so the schema baseline is 4. The description correctly does not invent parameter semantics where none exist.

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 the resource clearly: current Storylines competitions that are on sale. However, it does not use an explicit verb like list/returns and does not distinguish this from sibling tools such as get_storylines_games or get_storylines_facts.

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?

Implies the tool is for checking currently available competitions, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. With several sibling Storylines tools present, an agent gets no routing help.

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