sleeper_league_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety. Description adds the return shape, the keying by user_id, and the data model uniqueness, which is useful context beyond structured data.

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?

Description is front-loaded with a clear purpose, followed by a compact return type, example, and auth note. Every part adds value and no filler.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description fully covers what the tool returns, how to call it, and its unique role in the data model. The example makes it actionable.

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?

Input schema already describes league_id as required and part of the URL path with 100% coverage. Description adds an example league_id but doesn't explain semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns league users with display names and team names, keyed by user_id. It also specifies the exact return format and explicitly distinguishes itself from rosters by noting this is the only place a human name lives.

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?

Explicitly states this is the ONLY place a human name lives, contrasting with rosters that carry owner_id, not names. Also notes auth is none needed, so the agent knows it can be called without credentials.

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