Returns public DraftKings Daily Fantasy glossary terms and definitions from the How to Play page. Use to clarify DFS terminology without accessing contest or account data.
DraftKings Daily Fantasy glossary. Returns the public Daily Fantasy glossary terms and definitions from DraftKings' How to Play page. It does not access the contest lobby, player pool, or account data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.16Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well for a simple read-only lookup: it states the data is public, identifies the source page, and explicitly excludes contest lobby, player pool, and account data. It does not mention rate limits or response completeness, but the safety and scope profile is sufficiently clear.
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 short and front-loaded, with the resource stated first and scope exclusions immediately after. The opening phrase slightly restates the tool name, but overall it is efficient and easy to scan.
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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema glossary lookup, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what is returned, where it comes from, and what data is out of scope. No additional return-value explanation is required because no output schema exists and the content is described as terms and definitions.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not introduce confusing parameter-like assumptions.
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 a specific resource (DraftKings Daily Fantasy glossary terms and definitions) and a specific source (DraftKings' How to Play page), making the purpose clear. It distinguishes the tool from lobby/player-pool/account-data tools, but does not explicitly differentiate it from close siblings such as draftkings_dfs_guide or draftkings_dfs_rules_and_scoring.
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?
The implied use case is clear: retrieve glossary definitions. The description also rules out contest lobby, player pool, and account data, which adds useful negative guidance. However, it does not state when to prefer this over sibling glossary/guide/rules tools, so usage guidance remains implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.