euroleague_rounds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. Description adds response structure and 'Auth: none needed', which is beyond annotations. No contradictory behavior disclosed.

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?

Description is compact, front-loaded with purpose, and includes return shape, example, and auth – no waste.

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 simple 2-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return shape and auth. It could mention ordering or phaseTypeCode meanings, but is otherwise complete.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The example provides concrete values but does not add meaning beyond schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 'The rounds (matchdays) in a season, with their date windows' and 'Returns: {total, data:[...]}' – a specific resource with an explicit verb ('returns'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like euroleague_game, euroleague_seasons, and laliga_rounds by focusing on EuroLeague rounds.

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?

Provides an example call but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. No exclusions or mentioned alternatives. The use case is implied by the resource type.

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