sleeper_league

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description's addition of 'Auth: none needed' and the detailed return structure provides extra useful context. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 reasonably concise with clear sections for purpose, return values, example, and auth. The final 'Also answers this' line is somewhat cryptic but does not bloat the description excessively.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description provides a detailed return field list, a concrete example, and authentication requirements. For a simple single-parameter read-only tool, this is fairly 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 100% and the schema description for league_id is already informative (explains where to find it). The description's example with a concrete league_id adds a bit of clarity but does not significantly exceed the schema's documentation.

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 league configuration details including scoring rules, roster slots, playoff format, and waiver settings. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sleeper_league_rosters and sleeper_league_users, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'fetch'.

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?

Usage is implied by the description of league configuration, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over others. The mention of 'Also answers this: espnfantasy_league_defaults, espnfantasy_league, espnfantasy_league_settings' is vague and does not clearly define alternative use cases.

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