get_league_fixtures

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful detail that results are included alongside fixtures, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, default season handling, or status-filter semantics beyond what the schema states.

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?

The description is a single, extremely concise sentence with no filler or redundant content. It front-loads the core resource scope, though it is so brief that it sacrifices useful operational context.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and several closely related sibling tools, a one-line noun phrase is not enough. The description omits default season behavior, pagination, status filtering, and any distinction from get_fixtures or get_team_fixtures, leaving the agent under-informed for correct selection and invocation.

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 every parameter already has a meaningful description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, which matches the baseline of 3 for fully documented schemas.

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?

The description names the resource clearly: a league season's fixtures and results. The verb 'get' is present in the tool name, and the 'league season' scope distinguishes it from team-level or general fixture tools. However, it does not explicitly state the action or name a sibling it is not, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus get_fixtures, get_team_fixtures, or get_standings. The description does not mention defaults like season selection, status filtering, or pagination, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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