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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without the description repeating it. The description adds no further behavioral context (no rate limits, caching, or freshness notes), which is acceptable but unremarkable given the lower bar set by annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and the inputs second. No filler, though it packs three return types into one clause rather than stating the scope crisply.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and annotations cover the read-only nature. The description supplies purpose, both parameters, and the discovery path, leaving little an agent needs beyond this to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does: it identifies 'event' as a slug and 'matchday' as optional, and points to sportskeeda_football_options as the source of both values. It still omits format hints (e.g. expected slug shape or matchday format), keeping it short of a 5.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('Sportskeeda football matches, scores, and standings rows'), and it distinguishes itself from the sibling sportskeeda_football_options by framing that tool as the discovery step. The only mild weakness is that it doesn't spell out the exact scope (single event vs. all events), though the required 'event' param implies it.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent that the event slug and optional matchday come from sportskeeda_football_options, establishing a clear prerequisite and ordering against that sibling. It doesn't give explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the discovery dependency is a strong routing signal.

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