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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful edge-case behavior — a true empty schedule returns `no_matches` — which tells the agent how to interpret an apparently empty result. It stops short of describing pagination or shaping, but the sentinel detail is a real addition.

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 tight clauses: the core fetch behavior plus the empty-result sentinel come first, and the routing to alternatives comes last. No filler and every sentence carries actionable information.

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 and annotations covering safety, the description needs only routing, scope, and edge cases — all of which it supplies. A concrete slug example is the only minor omission, and the schema compensates for it.

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 description largely restates it ('by host-free slug' vs. the schema's 'Sportskeeda schedule path without host'). No format examples or valid-slug guidance beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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') and resource ('match cards and schedule tables') with an explicit scope ('cricket or football') and distinguishes itself from named siblings. An agent can tell what it returns and what it does not handle without opening the 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 routes the agent: 'Use sportskeeda_college_basketball_schedule for college basketball or sportskeeda_event_calendar for broader events.' Both the when-to-use-this and when-to-use-something-else conditions are stated with named alternatives.

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