pl_season_teams

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns data but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it is idempotent. The return structure is provided, but lacking broader behavioral context.

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, two short sentences, and front-loads the purpose. The return structure is included efficiently. However, it could be slightly more comprehensive without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters (2 required) and no output schema. The description explains the default limit of 20 teams but fails to clarify what cid and sid represent or how to obtain them from sibling tools. This leaves gaps for the agent to infer.

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 description does not explain the meaning of parameters cid and sid beyond the schema. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate by clarifying that cid is competition ID and sid is season ID. This omission hinders correct invocation.

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 returns teams in a given season, specifically the 20 teams in that season's table, and lists the return fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pl_teams and pl_team.

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 context for when to use: to get teams for a specific season. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the specificity implies its use case. More explicit guidance on when not to use it would improve clarity.

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