sportsdataio_nfl_dfs_slates

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds critical caveats: the return shape is 'from vendor docs' and 'has NOT been verified against a live response,' advising agents to inspect actual payloads. It also clarifies field semantics (FantasyPointsPerDollar is value; salaries are integer dollars) and documents auth requirements via specific env vars.

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 structured into purpose, return shape, caveat, example, and auth sections, all relevant. It is somewhat long but each sentence delivers necessary information for a complex tool; no fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides a detailed return shape including nested fields (DfsSlateGames, DfsSlatePlayers) and types, plus a reliability warning and example invocation. Auth requirements are also covered, making the tool fully usable by 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and both season and week are described as required URL path parts. The description adds a concrete example (season 2023, week 1) but no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 this tool returns 'DFS slates and player SALARIES for a week' across DraftKings, FanDuel, and Yahoo, and specifically notes it's not available from official NFL feeds. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sportsdataio_nfl_scores, sportsdataio_nfl_teams, and sportsdataio_nba_dfs_slates.

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 implies usage for DFS salary data with 'Not available from the official NFL feeds,' suggesting when to prefer this tool. It provides an example call, but does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when NOT to use this one, though the context is clear.

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