pl_broadcast_match_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, and idempotent hints. The description adds useful context: no auth required and the return shape. However, it does not describe pagination behavior beyond the schema's pageSize default, nor the nature of 'broadcast entries.' This is adequate for a read-only tool with strong 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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences covering purpose, return type, and authentication. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only list tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: purpose, key parameter, return shape, and auth. It could be enhanced by clarifying how this differs from pl_broadcasting_events, but it is not critically incomplete.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions. The description's mention of 'sportDataId = SDP match id' adds no value beyond the schema, which already states 'SDP match id (from pl_matches).' 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Broadcast events for a specific match' with a specific identifier (sportDataId). It distinguishes from likely siblings like pl_broadcasting_events by emphasizing 'specific match' rather than a general listing.

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?

Usage context is implied via 'specific match' and the note that sportDataId comes from pl_matches, but no explicit alternatives or exclusion criteria are provided. The agent must infer when to use this over pl_broadcasting_events or pl_match_events.

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