get_league_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It conveys the shape of the returned data (scoring type, roster slots, playoffs, trade deadline, waiver/FAAB), which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions, or caching for a metadata endpoint.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a rationale and the payload list. No filler, though the trailing list slightly restates the opening clause.

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?

With an output schema present, the description is not obligated to enumerate return fields, yet it does so briefly, which is helpful rather than harmful. For a zero-parameter, no-annotation metadata tool, nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies for a no-argument tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the league's scoring format and roster/structure settings') and names the concrete settings returned, so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling get_league_overview, which risks overlap confusion.

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?

'Essential context for evaluating player value' gives a clear situational trigger for calling the tool. There is no explicit statement of when not to use it or which sibling to prefer, so it stops short of a 5.

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