openligadb_table

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

The annotations declare read-only and idempotent, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: results are ordered top to bottom, and the semantics of `goals` vs `opponentGoals` are clarified. The 'Auth: none needed' note also adds practical context 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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by the return shape, ordering note, an example, and auth status. Every sentence contributes unique information with no filler or repetition.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return fields, ordering, an example, and auth requirements. The only minor gap is a lack of enumerated `league` shortcut values, but the default 'bl1' mitigates that.

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 has 100% field description coverage, so the description does not need to repeat those details. It adds an example and reiterates that `season` is required and part of the URL path, but provides no additional valid values for `league`, leaving the schema as the primary source.

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 identifies the tool as returning a league table for a season, which is distinct from sibling tools focused on matchdays, matches, or teams. The noun phrase lacks an explicit verb but the return field list makes the operation unambiguous.

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 a concrete example and states that no auth is needed, implying usage for fetching a league table. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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