laliga_subscriptions

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, so the description adds extra context: authentication requirements (works without a key, optional key unlocks more) and the exact return structure. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand side effects and access needs.

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 two sentences: the first defines the concept and pagination, the second lists the return fields and auth note. Every sentence carries useful information, with no redundancy or padding.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description is fully sufficient: it explains the pagination, the return shape in detail, and authentication. The absence of an output schema is compensated by listing the exact fields. No critical information is missing for selecting and invoking this 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?

The input schema fully documents the only parameter 'offset' with a clear description ('Pagination offset (20 per page).'). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond confirming the pagination size, so it neither improves nor detracts from the schema's coverage.

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 defines the tool as a paginated list of season instances, clarifying that a 'subscription' equals one competition's season. It distinguishes itself from related 'laliga_competitions' and 'laliga_subscription' by specifying the list-oriented, paginated nature and the fields returned.

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 implies use for retrieving multiple season instances via pagination, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like laliga_subscription (singular) or laliga_competitions. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, leaving the decision to the agent based on the plural/paginated framing.

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