list_sportsbooks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that availability is plan-dependent and mentions the free-tier limitation, which is a behavioral trait not otherwise visible. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, though it doesn't explicitly state side-effect-free behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states what the tool does, the second supplies usage guidance and plan caveats. No filler, front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is listed, what the ids are for, and how plan restrictions affect results. An agent can call this tool correctly and understand its role within the sibling ecosystem.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers parameter meaning by having none. The description adds value by explaining how the resulting ids feed into another argument, which is relevant even though this tool takes no inputs.

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 verb ('List'), a specific resource ('sportsbooks SharpAPI normalizes'), and the key detail that ids are included. It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_sports and list_events by naming the domain object.

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 gives clear operational context: returned ids should be used for the 'sportsbook' argument elsewhere, and plan-based access limits are explained. It doesn't mention explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the guidance is concrete and useful.

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