Get Match Details

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior; the description adds the auth posture ('Public — no auth') and clarifies that includeIntelligence pulls the form/H2H/context snapshot. It does not add rate-limit or pagination details, but for a simple public read with this annotation coverage that is acceptable.

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?

Three short clauses in two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the optional parameter and auth note. No filler.

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 simple public read endpoint with two parameters and no output schema, this is complete: the agent knows exactly what to pass, what the optional flag does, and that no auth is required. The missing comparison to flab_evaluate_match is a usage-nuance gap, not a blocking invocation gap.

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%, giving a baseline of 3; the description goes beyond by explaining that includeIntelligence=true fetches the sports-intelligence snapshot and enumerates its content (form, H2H, context), which adds real value beyond the schema's '/intelligence snapshot'.

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?

Description gives a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('a single match'), and lookup key ('by ID'), which cleanly separates it from list-style siblings like flab_matches_today. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling flab_evaluate_match, so it isn't fully differentiated among the single-match 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?

States the tool is public and no auth is needed, and explains when to add includeIntelligence=true, but does not mention when to choose this over flab_evaluate_match or list endpoints. Usage is mostly implied by 'single match by ID' rather than explicitly routed.

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