tab_sports_next_to_go

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions ordering by close time and return format but omits critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, or how jurisdiction filtering works. The lack of annotation support amplifies this deficiency.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded with purpose, but it sacrifices essential parameter explanations. It is concise but not sufficiently helpful, earning a middle score.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to address any parameter behavior, usage context, or edge cases, leaving the agent without adequate information to use the tool effectively.

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 0% and the description does not explain any of the 7 parameters (e.g., 'next', 'openOnly', 'futuresOnly'). The agent has no semantic understanding of these inputs, severely hindering correct invocation.

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 it returns 'sport events about to close, ordered by close time,' which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'tab_sports' (general sports list) and 'tab_sports_results' (results). The verb 'returns' and resource 'sport events about to close' are precise.

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. There is no mention of scenarios where other sibling tools (e.g., 'tab_sports', 'tab_match') would be more appropriate, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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