FFBB MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the retrieval operation and what data is returned, but lacks details about error conditions, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether it's a read-only operation. The description doesn't contradict any annotations (since none exist), but could provide more behavioral context.

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 that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance. Every word serves a purpose - no redundant information or unnecessary elaboration. The French text is efficiently structured.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good context about what the tool does, how to use it, and what data it returns. It could be more complete by mentioning error cases or response format, but given the simplicity of the tool, it's reasonably comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only 1 parameter, the description adds significant value by explaining that the competition_id parameter is required and that it should be obtained from ffbb_search_competitions. While it doesn't provide format details beyond 'ID', this is adequate given the single integer parameter context.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Récupère les détails complets' - retrieves complete details) and resource ('une compétition FFBB' - a FFBB competition), distinguishing it from siblings like ffbb_search_competitions (which finds IDs) and ffbb_get_poule (which gets pool details). It provides concrete examples of what details are returned (name, type, season, pools, teams).

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 states when to use this tool ('à partir de son ID' - from its ID) and when to use an alternative ('Utilise ffbb_search_competitions pour trouver l'ID d'une compétition' - Use ffbb_search_competitions to find the ID of a competition). This provides clear guidance on the workflow and distinguishes it from sibling tools.

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