pl_broadcast_match_events

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the return format (pageInfo and content with broadcast entries) but omits details like authentication, rate limits, error handling, pagination mechanics, or any side effects. The description is too minimal for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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?

Two sentences, zero wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. Return format is briefly summarized in the second. Perfectly concise for a straightforward look-up tool.

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 no output schema, the description does include the return structure. However, it lacks guidance on pagination (despite pageSize) and does not mention what 'broadcast entries' contain. For a simple query tool with minimal parameters, it is adequate but 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 description coverage is 0%, requiring rich parameter explanations. The description only explains 'sportDataId' (as SDP match id) but ignores 'pageSize' entirely—its default, purpose, or effect on results. This leaves half the parameters semantically unclear.

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 action ('Broadcast events') and the specific resource ('for a specific match'), and provides a key mapping for the required parameter (sportDataId = SDP match id). It distinguishes itself from general broadcast event tools (like pl_broadcasting_events) by focusing on a single match, but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., pl_broadcasting_events for all broadcasts or pl_match_events for match events). It does not state prerequisites, conditions, or avoid scenarios.

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