betr_sports_category

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the output structure and does not state whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires specific permissions.

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 a single sentence plus a return structure example, making it concise. However, key information (e.g., how to get CategoryId) is missing, which slightly reduces effectiveness.

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 the nested return structure, lack of output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to interpret the returned data or any constraints on the parameter.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain the meaning of CategoryId. It only says 'one sport category (competition)', which is already implied by the parameter name. No examples or value ranges are provided.

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 it retrieves events and markets for one sport category (competition) and provides the return structure. This helps distinguish it from sibling tools like betr_master_category or betr_event_types, but could be more explicit about how 'events + markets' relates.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like betr_master_category or betr_event_types. Despite a clear purpose, the absence of usage context forces the agent to infer selection 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.