pinnacle_sport_matchups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds return structure, an auth note, and an example, which is useful extra context. It does not mention pagination or sorting, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a return array, an example, and an auth note. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy or filler.

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 a single parameter, the description provides sufficient information: return shape, example invocation, and auth requirements. The missing definition of 'highlighted' is a minor gap, but the open-world hint and simple scope make it adequately complete.

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 schema description fully covers sportId ('Sport id, from pinnacle_sports. Required — part of the URL path.'), so the description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema. The example (sportId: 3) is a usage illustration but not new parameter meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states 'Highlighted matchups for one sport' – a specific verb ('returns') with a clear resource ('matchups') and scope ('one sport'). It distinguishes from siblings like pinnacle_sport_matchups_all and pinnacle_league_matchups via the word 'highlighted' and 'one sport'.

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 for featured/highlighted matchups as opposed to all or live variants, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. The example shows how to call with sportId but provides no clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance.

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