Swap champion with ARAM bench

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the failure mode (fails cleanly if the champion is not on the bench or champ select is inactive) and the required write-allowlist endpoint. Combined with the destructive/non-idempotent hints, an agent knows the mutation semantics, its safety profile, and the prerequisite.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by usage scope, alternatives, and behavior. Every sentence carries distinct load with no padding.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, triggers, alternatives, failure conditions, and the required endpoint. Nothing an agent needs to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the single 'champion' parameter and its name-or-numeric-ID type. The description restates the same identifier forms but adds no new syntax, formatting, or constraint details (e.g. casing, bench position), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (swaps) and resource (active champion with an ARAM bench champion), plus the accepted identifier forms. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling lol_workflow_champ_select, so an agent can tell them apart without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly scopes usage to ARAM champion select when a preferred champion appears on the shared bench, and routes to named alternatives: lol_workflow_champ_select for draft/hover/ban and lol_workflow_spells_set for spells. When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both covered.

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