pointsbet_sport_featured_events

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, and idempotent hints. The description adds valuable context: 'Auth: none needed' and a detailed return structure. It also clarifies the tool only returns event headers, not markets, which is behavior beyond the 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences plus a return type line. Every sentence provides necessary information (purpose, alternative, return shape, auth), with no fluff or 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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only tool, the description is quite complete: it states the input, output structure, auth requirements, and related tool usage. It lacks details like pagination or what 'featured' means, but these are not critical for such a tool, and the return structure compensates for the lack of an output schema.

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 100% for the only parameter (sportKey), which already explains it is a required sport slug and part of the URL path. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so 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: fetching featured (highlighted) events for a single sport. It uses a specific verb+resource ('Featured events for one sport') and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool pointsbet_event by explicitly directing market calls to that tool.

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 explicit guidance: 'call pointsbet_event for markets' indicates an alternative tool for a different purpose (markets vs. event headers). This tells the agent when to use this tool (to get event headers) and when not to (when markets are needed).

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