sportsbet_sport_resulted_events

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

The term 'Resulted (finished)' indicates these are completed events, and the return format is described. However, no annotations are provided, and the description omits behavioral details such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if no events match.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that front-load the purpose and return structure. Every word adds value with no extraneous content.

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 complexity (3 required params, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools), the description is too sparse. It fails to explain how to obtain competitionId/classId, date format, or how this tool differs from other sports result tools like sportsbet_event_results or sportsbet_competition_matches.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters, but it only loosely mentions 'sport competition + class + date' without clarifying input formats, constraints, or how to resolve competitionId/classId. The param names are self-explanatory but lack sufficient detail.

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 resulted (finished) events for a sport competition, class, and date, and specifies the return format. This distinguishes it from racing-specific tools like sportsbet_racing_resulted_events, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar sport result tools like sportsbet_event_results.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as how to obtain competitionId or classId, nor does it compare with sibling tools like sportsbet_event_results or sportsbet_competition_matches.

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