afl_teams_list

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions return structure and team count (150), but omits pagination behavior despite page/pageSize params. Does not disclose rate limits, authentication, or side effects.

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?

Two sentences: first clearly states purpose and scope, second shows return structure. No wasted words, front-loaded with key 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?

Includes return structure (helpful given no output schema) and team count. However, missing pagination explanation and any filtering or sorting details. For a list tool with many siblings, more context could improve differentiation.

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 0% and description does not mention page or pageSize parameters. Despite defaults, no guidance on how parameters control output or their meaning.

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?

Description clearly states 'List teams' with specific scope including AFL men, AFLW, state leagues, and historical teams. This differentiates from siblings like afl_team_get (single team) and afl_clubs_list (clubs vs teams).

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?

Description implies usage for listing teams but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like afl_teams_idmap or afl_team_get. No exclusions or context about pagination or filtering.

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