List every lottery this site publishes results for, with the size of each draw machine (how many numbers are picked, and from how many). Call this first if you are unsure which lotteries are covered or what code to use.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It states the output includes the size of each draw machine and that it publishes results for all lotteries, disclosing the scope of the operation. It doesn't provide unrelated meta-information, but the nature is clear.
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, first sentence is action-oriented, second provides a clear use case. No redundant or extra words.
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?
Given the zero params, no output schema, and no annotations, this description provides everything needed: what the tool does, what it returns (each lottery plus draw machine size), and when to use it. It is fully self-contained.
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 the baseline is 4. The description adds no param info because none is needed; the tool takes no arguments. The mention of 'code to use' refers to the output's usefulness for subsequent calls, not parameters.
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 opens with 'List every lottery this site publishes results for' - a specific verb (list) and resource (every lottery), and explains the output includes draw machine size. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like latest_results and lottery_results, which focus on fetching specific results.
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 explicitly instructs to 'Call this first if you are unsure which lotteries are covered or what code to use', giving direct when-to-use guidance and implicitly directing toward sibling tools for actual results retrieval.
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.