entain_sport_event_request

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses the response shape with top-level keys and explains authentication behavior ('works without a key; ENTAIN_REFRESH_TOKEN unlocks more if set'). This adds useful operational context not available in the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the main capability stated first, followed by return structure and auth notes. Every line contributes meaningful information with no filler.

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 single-parameter bulk fetch tool with read-only annotations, the description covers the main capability, return keys, and auth requirements. It does not mention pagination or response size limits, but the provided details are otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents category_ids as a required JSON array of sport category UUIDs. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond clarifying 'one or more' categories, which is already implied by the JSON array type.

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 states the tool returns bulk events, markets, and prices for one or more sport categories, which is specific and distinguishes it from single-event tools like entain_sport_event_card. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'Get' or 'Fetch', but the intent is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'for one or more sport categories' clearly signals the intended use case of bulk retrieval across categories. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use the tool, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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