sleeper_transactions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description does not contradict them. It adds useful context by noting 'Auth: none needed' and providing the return structure, which is helpful given there is no output schema. The added value is modest but above baseline.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose. The return format, example, and auth note each serve a distinct informative role without redundancy. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, the return structure, an example invocation, and auth requirements. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance and the week caveat ('returns whole season in some leagues') resides only in the schema, not the description.

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%, with both league_id and week described in the schema. The description provides an example call but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 retrieves 'Adds, drops, waiver claims and trades for one week,' using a specific verb-like enumeration and scope. This distinctly differentiates it from sibling tools like sleeper_matchups or sleeper_traded_picks. The return format further clarifies the resource.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus other Sleeper tools, nor any exclusions. The example and description imply it is for fetching weekly transactions, but no alternatives are mentioned, such as directing users to sleeper_traded_picks for traded picks specifically.

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