sportsbet_event_markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying that prices are live, that the tool works without a key, and that an optional token unlocks more 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a practical return-shape snippet and an auth note. The return block earns its place because there is no output schema to document the response structure.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description is nearly complete: it documents the return structure, notes the live-price behavior, and provides auth requirements. The only minor gap is that 'unlocks more' is vague about what additional data becomes available.

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%, and eventId is already described as the required sport event id and URL path component. The description references 'one sport event' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 all markets, selections, and live prices for one sport event, which is a specific retrieval purpose. It is also distinguishable from sibling tools like sportsbet_event_results or sportsbet_event_status by naming exactly what data it returns.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sportsbet_competition_matches, sportsbet_event_status, or other betting-market tools. The auth note is useful but does not help an agent choose among sibling tools.

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