sportsbet_league_ladder

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states the return format but omits details like authentication, error handling, what happens with invalid competitionId, or whether the tool is read-only.

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?

Two sentences state purpose and return format without extraneous text. It is concise, though it lacks structured sections like using when or examples.

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 the single parameter and no output schema, the description could be more complete. It does not mention required inputs, competition scope, or error scenarios, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 description does not explain what competitionId represents or how to obtain valid values. The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond implying it identifies a competition.

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 it returns league ladder/standings and specifies the return object structure. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling ladder tools like nbl_ladder or pl_standings, nor does it mention the sportsbet context explicitly.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify that this is for sportsbet competitions, nor does it provide any conditions or exclusions for usage.

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