metaculus_tournament_questions

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must disclose behavior. It notes the tool is credential-free and returns normalized data from a public feed, but lacks details on rate limits, pagination, error handling, or data freshness. The description provides minimal behavioral context beyond the immediate purpose.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the key noun phrase 'Metaculus tournament questions' followed by the action. It is concise and avoids unnecessary words, earning its place without redundancy.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return format, pagination (implied by limit), and what 'normalized' means. It covers basic usage but leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and constraints.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (limit and slug). It does not explain what a 'slug' is or how to find it, so the schema and description together are adequate but not enriched.

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 tool returns normalized Metaculus question rows from a public tournament feed page, specifying the resource (tournament questions), action (returns), and credential-free nature. It distinguishes from sibling tools like metaculus_question and metaculus_questions by focusing on tournament context.

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 description mentions 'credential-free' implying no authentication needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like metaculus_questions or metaculus_project_questions. No when-not or alternative tool references are provided, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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