dabble_active_competitions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the tool returns a specific structure with fields like id, name, sportName, etc., and that it returns all currently-bettable competitions. There is no mention of destructive behavior, which is appropriate for a read-only listing tool.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with the tool's purpose, then guides the agent on how to use the result, and ends with the return structure. Every sentence adds value 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 it's a simple list tool with one optional parameter and the output shape is fully described in the description (including the exact JSON structure), the description is complete. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the detailed return format in the description.

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?

There is one optional parameter (sportId) with no description in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description explains that passing sportId filters to one sport's active competitions, adding meaning beyond the schema. No other parameters exist.

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 lists 'every currently-bettable competition across all sports (~318)' and positions it as 'the discovery entry point'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dabble_competition_fixtures by instructing the agent to pick an id and pass it to that tool.

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 tells when to use this tool (as an entry point) and how to proceed after getting results (pass id to dabble_competition_fixtures). It also explains the optional sportId filter. While no explicit when-not or alternatives are given, the context is clear enough for an agent.

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