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. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral quirk not present in structured fields: player names are emitted in the site's 'Surname, Forename' order, which affects how results are read. It does not, however, mention pagination or result-size limits.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and the variants, then the naming convention, then the alternative routing. No wasted clauses.

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?

Output schema exists so return fields need not be explained, and annotations cover safety; the description still states the meaningful result shapes and the name-ordering gotcha. Minor gaps remain around pagination/limits and how a season interacts with departures, but nothing essential to correct invocation 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% and the schema already documents kind (squad/arrivals/departures, default squad), season (2627 format, default current), and team_id. The description restates the variant names but adds no new meaning such as season edge cases or id formats. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the work.

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 and resource (returns a team's players for a season) and enumerates the three result variants: squad with appearances/minutes/goals, arrivals, and departures. This is clearly distinguishable from the team-profile and scorer-list siblings.

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 fussballde_team for the team profile or fussballde_top_scorers for a competition scorer list.' The alternative and the condition selecting it are named directly.

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