pl_team_form

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only describes the output structure (array of matches with fields) but fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, has limits, or any side effects. The return format is specified but lacks completeness.

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 sentences) and to the point. However, its brevity sacrifices essential details, making it less effective. It is well-structured but could include parameter descriptions within the same space.

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 absence of an output schema and parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It only partially describes the return format and omits guidance on parameters, usage, and behavioral context. A 5-parameter tool with no schema coverage requires a much richer description.

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 input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description offers no explanation of what cid, sid, tid, seasons, or competitions represent or how they should be used. This is a critical gap for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 a team's recent matches/form within a season and lists the output fields. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like pl_team, pl_team_stats, or pl_team_leaderboard, which could cause confusion.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any preconditions, required authentication, or contextual hints for selection among many sibling team-related tools.

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