twitch_team

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it does add one useful signal: 'Public data sourced from Twitch's own GraphQL API,' implying no private data or auth constraints. It doesn't go further to mention rate limits, error cases, or whether the order/pagination is handled, leaving some behavior unexplained.

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 core action and resource, and every clause contributes value—roster contents, live status/viewer count, team metadata, and data source. There is no redundant or filler phrasing.

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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the important return fields and source attributes. It doesn't mention error conditions or pagination, but that is a minor gap given the simple lookup nature of this tool.

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 schema already covers the only parameter with a clear description (Twitch team slug from twitch.tv/team/{slug}), so the description adds no extra meaning for parameters. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource ('Get a Twitch team's roster') and lists the concrete output contents (member roster, live status, viewer count, team metadata), which clearly differentiates it from other Twitch tools like twitch_streams or twitch_channel. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast a sibling alternative, so it loses the point for explicit differentiation.

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 intended use is easy to infer from 'Get a Twitch team's roster,' which implies you should call this when you need team membership or live-status data for a Twitch team. There is no explicit guidance about when NOT to use it or which sibling to prefer, so usage context is only implied rather than stated.

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