pl_team_leaderboard

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It notes that season is a query parameter (not path) and describes the return format. However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, authentication requirements, or behavior on invalid sort values.

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 plus a note and example. Every sentence adds value, front-loaded with purpose. No redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, description explains the return format (pagination, data array) and provides an example. But missing details on cid, limit, and sort parameter constraints. Adequate for main purpose but not fully 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains sort (by any Opta team metric) and season (query param). But cid and limit are not described, and valid sort values are not enumerated. Adds some value but incomplete.

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 stat leaderboard sorted by Opta team metrics, with explicit return structure (pagination, data with teamMetadata and stats). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pl_player_leaderboard and pl_standings by focusing on Opta team metrics.

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?

Provides an example (2025/26 teams by tackles won) but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like pl_team_stats or pl_standings. Does not state prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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