pinnacle_sport_leagues

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes the return format (array of objects with id, name, group, isFeatured, matchupCount) and scope (one sport). It does not mention potential errors or limits, but for a simple retrieval tool this is sufficient.

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 very concise: two sentences plus a return structure example. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (one param, no output schema), the description adequately explains what it returns and the required input. It is complete for basic usage, though it could clarify how to obtain sportId.

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 only parameter (sportId) is not described beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only says 'for one sport', which is vague. No valid values or examples provided.

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 returns leagues for one sport, with a specific verb ('Leagues') and resource ('for one sport'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pinnacle_sport_matchups by focusing on league data rather than matchups.

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 usage (for retrieving leagues of a specific sport) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like pinnacle_sport_matchups or other league-related tools. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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