tab_recommendation_featured

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, and the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the 404 behavior when the category is not featured, the exact return shape, and authentication requirements. This gives an agent a strong picture of what will happen at call time.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, return shape, example, and auth note. Each section earns its place and the purpose is front-loaded. Slightly more verbose than necessary, but no wasted sentences.

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 low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains the resource, the error condition, the return shape, an example invocation, and auth behavior. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents both parameters, including the requirement to pass raw spaces and that category is part of the URL path. The description adds an example but no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 states a specific action and resource: 'Featured items for one recommendation category' with concrete examples like Jockey Challenge and Racing Extras. It clearly scopes the tool to a single category and mentions a 404 error condition, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as tab_featured_events.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no conditions or exclusions beyond the 404 behavior, and no mention of related TAB tools that might be more appropriate for broader featured content. The example and auth note provide context but not selection guidance.

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