trade_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the trade block is visible to the whole league, which is useful, but it never explains the mutation path (add/remove), the purpose of the unexplained 'confirm' flag, permission requirements, or reversibility.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core read/set statement, and the read-mode instruction is placed last where it is useful. No notable 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?

The output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but a five-parameter tool with zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and an opaque 'confirm' parameter is left substantially under-specified by the description.

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?

All five parameters (add, remove, confirm, league_id_, roster_id_) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description names none of them. Aside from implicitly distinguishing the zero-argument read mode, it adds no meaning about what any parameter does or what format is expected.

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+resource: read or set which players are advertised as available, and clarifies the trade block's league-wide visibility. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not name a sibling (e.g. propose_trade, trade_targets) to differentiate against.

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?

'Call with no arguments to read it' gives one clear usage condition for the read mode, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings like propose_trade or trade_targets, and no exclusions are stated.

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