sportsbet_sports_classes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that no auth is needed and shows the return structure, which is useful. It also uses an example to convey that results are scoped to a date window with events, though the filtering behavior is not explicitly stated.

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, with two sentences plus a concise example and auth note. The purpose is front-loaded, and every element (purpose, return format, example, auth) adds value without 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description provides purpose, return format, a practical example, and auth requirements. It lacks explicit detail on how the optional boolean parameters alter results, but that information is in the schema. Overall, it is sufficiently complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's example demonstrates the date format but does not add new meaning to includeLiveEvents or excludeNonLiveEvents beyond what the schema already provides.

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 sport classes (sports) with their competitions for a date window, and provides the return shape {classList:[{classId, className, classDisplayOrder}]}. This identifies the resource and scope, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sportsbet_sports_card or sportsbet_class_coupon.

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 example 'Sports with events in the next 24 hours' illustrates a concrete use case, and 'Auth: none needed' provides a prerequisite. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any exclusions or when-not-to-use statements.

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