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 and 3 is the floor. The description adds that 'featured' is a current, DK-curated flag (implying the set is dynamic) and previews the content fields it returns. It does not mention freshness, pagination, or result size, so it stays short of a 5 given the output schema already documents returns.

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, front-loaded with what it returns followed by the disambiguation. Every clause earns its place: contents, usage trigger, and two named alternatives.

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 parameterless read-only list tool with an output schema handling return structure and annotations handling safety, the description supplies everything an agent needs: scope, use trigger, and sibling routing. No gaps remain.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter syntax for the description to add. Schema coverage is 100% on an empty object. Baseline 4 applies; nothing is missing and nothing extra was needed.

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 ('List') and resource ('leagues DraftKings currently marks as featured'), plus the payload contents (IDs, capability tags, live-offer status). It explicitly distinguishes itself from draftkings_leagues (broader directory) and draftkings_quick_links (homepage ordering), so an agent can select it without opening any schema.

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 names the condition for use ('for prioritized competitions') and the two alternatives with their respective scopes. This is textbook when-to-use/when-not guidance with the routing decision spelled out.

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