nhl_schedule

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds useful context: the return value structure, grouped-by-day organization, and 'Auth: none needed.' This goes beyond what annotations provide without contradicting them.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, a compact return type definition, and a practical example. It is slightly lengthy due to the return block, but every sentence adds value, especially since there is no output schema to rely on.

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 tool with a single optional parameter, the description covers the main use case, return format, and authentication requirements. It lacks explicit guidance on divergences from sibling tools (e.g., nhl_club_schedule) but otherwise provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 already fully documents the 'date' parameter with format and meaning, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description's example ('date: now') is redundant, adding no new semantic information beyond the schema.

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 the league schedule for a week, grouped by day, with a specific resource (league schedule) and verb (retrieve). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nhl_club_schedule, which focuses on a single club's schedule.

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 provides clear context: it handles the current week or a given date's week, with an example using 'now'. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the scope is unambiguous and the example clarifies typical usage.

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