List esports teams

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes fetching and returning metadata, which is a read operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication needs. The limit parameter in schema indicates default/max but is not mentioned in description.

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 sentence followed by a bullet list of return fields. It is concise and front-loaded, with no redundant or extraneous 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?

Given the tool has 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not mention that the 'wiki' parameter is required, nor does it explain the 'conditions' parameter or the interaction between structured filters and raw conditions. The returned field list is helpful but lacks detail on the return structure.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description highlights three filter parameters (name, region, location) but does not add meaning to other parameters (limit, order, query, conditions, wiki) beyond what the schema provides. It repeats some schema info but does not enhance understanding.

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 action ('Fetch teams') and the resource ('teams for a wiki'), with explicit filter options and return fields. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_players or list_matches by focusing on team metadata.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for team data retrieval, but does not exclude cases where other list tools might be more appropriate (e.g., use list_players for player data).

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