get_upcoming_matches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the one-line purpose. It does not say whether this is a read-only lookup, how the day window is applied, whether results are ordered or capped, or what the response contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriate sizing for a simple lookup tool. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the other gaps.

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 2-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented 'days' parameter, the description is too thin. Nothing tells the agent what a result row is, how the default 7-day window behaves, or what happens when 'tokens' is omitted.

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 only 50%: 'tokens' has a description ('Token symbols to check') but 'days' has none, leaving the time-window semantics undefined. The description's phrase 'for fan token teams' loosely hints at the tokens parameter but adds no meaning for the days parameter or how the two interact.

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 ('Get upcoming matches') scoped to 'fan token teams', which distinguishes it from fixtures-adjacent siblings like get_league_standings and analyze_team_performance. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 on when to call this versus alternatives such as get_fan_token_price, get_league_standings, or analyze_team_performance, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer the use case from the name alone.

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