sportsbet_trending_sgm

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

The description discloses the return structure but fails to mention side effects, data freshness, or that the operation is read-only. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it is insufficient.

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 brief but includes a return format example, which is helpful. However, it could be more concise by removing unnecessary details like the exact JSON structure, though it aids clarity.

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 tool has one parameter and no output schema, the description provides a minimal return structure. However, it lacks context about input interpretation and edge cases, making it only moderately 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 single parameter 'id' of type integer is not explained. The description implies it is for a sport event, but does not clarify what the id represents (e.g., event ID, competition ID). With 0% schema coverage, the description adds little value.

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 'Trending Same Game Multi (SGM) combinations for one sport event' with a specific return format example. It is a specific verb+resource combination, distinguishing it from other sportsbet tools.

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, such as other SGM or betting tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for invoking the tool.

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