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 known. The description adds that the useful outputs are slate_id/event_id and that this is a prerequisite lookup, which is helpful context. It does not describe pagination, coverage limits, or how 'today' resolves, but with an output schema present those gaps are mitigated.

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 no waste, front-loading what is listed before the prerequisite rationale. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only lookup with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies everything needed: what it returns, how to scope it, and why it must be called before projections. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the date format, NFL week range, and sport values. The description restates the scoping logic and adds the golf event_id purpose but no parameter syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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) plus resource (daily-fantasy slates) and enumerates the variants (Main, All Day, single games) and scoping options (today, a date, an NFL week, golf events). An agent can distinguish it from fanduel_research_projections and fanduel_research_fixtures without opening a 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 downstream dependency: 'Use it to get the slate_id (and golf event_id) that DAILY projections in fanduel_research_projections require.' That is a concrete when-to-use statement tied to a named sibling, which is exactly the routing guidance an agent needs.

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