The most recent winning numbers for every lottery covered, in one call. Use this for "what were last night's numbers" or any question that does not name a specific past date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It usefully discloses aggregate scope (every lottery in one call), but is silent on return format, caching, or potential side effects. Read-only nature is implied but not stated.
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 sentences with minimal, high-signal wording. The first sentence states the result and scope; the second gives concrete usage examples. No redundancy or filler.
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, zero-parameter read operation, the description covers the what and when-to-use adequately. It lacks an output schema but does state the returned concept ('winning numbers'). A more formal structure description would be nice, but is not essential for tool selection.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially satisfied. The description reinforces the no-input call with 'in one call' and adds no confusing detail. This matches the baseline for a 0-parameter tool.
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 identifies the exact object ('most recent winning numbers') and scope ('every lottery covered, in one call'). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly contrasting with questions that name a specific past date, making this tool's purpose unambiguous.
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?
Provides clear usage examples ('what were last night's numbers') and an exclusion criterion ('does not name a specific past date'). It does not explicitly name the alternative tool, but sibling 'lottery_results' is the obvious candidate for date-specific queries.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
latest_results and lottery_results both return winning numbers, which could cause minor confusion. However, latest_results explicitly covers all lotteries at once for the most recent draw, while lottery_results targets a single lottery with history or specific date, making the distinction clear from descriptions.
All tool names use snake_case consistently, but the patterns differ: list_lotteries follows a verb_noun format, while latest_results and lottery_results use adjective_noun. This is not chaotic, but the lack of a consistent verb prefix (e.g., get_) across all tools prevents a higher score.
Three tools is an appropriate scope for a lottery results server. Each tool serves a clear purpose: listing available lotteries, getting the latest combined results, and querying specific lottery history or dates, without unnecessary bloat.
The tool set covers the core lifecycle of accessing lottery results: discovering lotteries, retrieving latest draws, and fetching historical results by date. A minor gap is lack of support for date-range queries or filtering, but the existing functionality handles the primary use cases well.