mlb_divisions

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

The description is straightforward, providing the return structure and indicating it is a catalogue (read-only). While no annotations are given, the description adds value by specifying the returned fields and indicating it is a simple lookup.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded, clearly stating the purpose and return format without unnecessary words.

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?

While the return format is provided, the description omits any explanation of the input parameters and their role in filtering, which is critical for a tool with three optional parameters and no output schema.

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 description does not mention the three parameters (sportId, leagueId, divisionId) or explain their meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to guess how to filter divisions.

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 it is a 'Division catalogue' with specific divisions (AL/NL East, Central, West) and details the return format, making it distinct from sibling tools like mlb_leagues or mlb_sports.

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 it is used for retrieving division information, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like mlb_leagues or how the optional parameters filter results.

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