euroleague_games

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds substantial context: return field structure, the local/road naming convention, identifier format, auth requirements, and the crucial gameCode-vs-uuid gotcha. This goes well beyond 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?

Although longer than typical, the description is tightly structured and every sentence earns its place: purpose, return schema, gotcha, example, auth. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains 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?

With no output schema, the description fully explains the return shape with a detailed structure and example. It also covers size/pagination concerns, field naming, and authentication, making it complete for a listing 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds usage context beyond the schema by explaining why limit/roundNumber matter (size ~800 KB) and providing an example call, which helps the agent choose and combine parameters correctly.

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 returns 'Games in a season with scores, venue and officials,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like euroleague_game by noting that per-game tools should use gameCode, not the uuid returned here.

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?

Explicitly advises to 'pass a limit or filter by round' due to the ~800 KB size, and warns to 'use gameCode (an int) for the per-game tools, not the uuid.' This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives.

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