sportsgameodds_bookmakers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the return shape (with field names), a clear caveat that the shape is from vendor docs and may be unverified, and the authentication requirement (SPORTSGAMEODDS_API_KEY). This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand reliability and setup.

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 and every sentence serves a purpose: definition, return shape, reliability caveat, example, and auth. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds essential caveats. No fluff or 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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, the shape, reliability uncertainty, and auth. The 'indexed' phrasing is slightly ambiguous but the example and shape clarify it. It is appropriately complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description references the output field 'byBookmaker' which gives useful context about how the returned IDs are used, but no parameter explanation is needed. The description does not detract from the schema.

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 identifies the resource (bookmakers) and states that it returns the bookmakers indexed, along with the ids used in byBookmaker. The example 'Every bookmaker' reinforces that this is a list-all operation. However, it lacks an explicit action verb like 'List' or 'Retrieve', which slightly reduces clarity.

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 mention of 'ids used in byBookmaker' implies a use case: to obtain bookmaker IDs for use in other tools that require that parameter. This is useful but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusion or alternative guidance is provided.

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