sleeper_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the exact return structure (list of fields) and stating 'Auth: none needed,' which is useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence overview, a usage tip, a return-field list, an example, and an auth note. Every element earns its place with 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?

Without an output schema, the description fully documents the return fields and provides an example. It also covers auth and usage context. The only minor gap is that the description says 'NFL state' while the parameter allows other sports, leaving slight ambiguity about non-NFL usage.

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 fully describes the single 'sport' parameter with an enum and a note about NFL being the live one. The description adds an example but no further parameter semantics. Since schema coverage is 100%, 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: retrieving current NFL state including season, week, and scoring status. It also provides a specific usage directive ('Call this to resolve 'this week' instead of guessing'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on user/league data. The example further grounds the purpose.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use the tool (to resolve 'this week') and frames it as a substitute for guessing. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is clear and sufficient for a simple state-retrieval tool.

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