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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds that results are 'ranked' and tied to a discovered stat id, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or ordering behavior, so it adds only modest context beyond the 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded and the routing guidance follows immediately, with no redundant restatement of the name or schema.

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?

With an output schema present the return shape need not be described, and the annotations cover safety. The description supplies the prerequisite discovery step and the sibling routing, so an agent has enough to call it correctly, though it omits any note on optional filters like team_id or position.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented in the schema. The description implies the stat and type inputs via 'player or team' and 'selected league stat' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the 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 (Fetch), resource (ranked player or team statistics), and scope (for a selected FotMob league stat). It also differentiates itself from siblings by naming fotmob_player_stats and fotmob_table as the alternatives for adjacent needs.

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 routes the agent: use fotmob_stats_categories first to discover valid stats, fotmob_player_stats for a single player, and fotmob_table for standings. The conditions selecting each alternative are stated, leaving little to inference.

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