Set Lineup

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that this is a 'REAL CHANGE' and that player_ids must contain exactly 11 ids in lineup order, but it omits important mutation context such as permissions, replacement behavior, error conditions, and what the response provides.

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 description is short and front-loaded: the core action and mutation warning appear first, followed by targeted parameter notes. There is no wasted text, and the structure makes the important constraints easy to scan.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers player_ids and formation adequately but leaves league_id undocumented and does not provide enough behavioral context about side effects or failure modes.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains player_ids well by specifying exactly 11 ids in lineup order and adds formation guidance including a common default, but it does not mention league_id at all, leaving one parameter undocumented.

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 and resource: 'Set the starting eleven.' It also signals that this is a meaningful mutation with 'REAL CHANGE to your team.' However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling read tool get_my_lineup, which limits sibling differentiation slightly.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'Set the starting eleven' and by the note to use get_my_lineup context for formation. But the description does not explicitly say when to call this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites such as valid league context or ownership constraints.

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