Unscout Player

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure for a mutation tool. It says nothing about whether removal is idempotent, what happens if the player was never scouted, whether authentication or a specific league context is required, or what is returned.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient but arguably under-specified rather than concise, leaving no room for the behavioral and parameter context an agent needs.

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 an undocumented optional league_id, one sentence is not enough. The agent lacks the confirmation, error, and scoping information needed to call it correctly.

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 and does not. player_id is self-evident, but league_id (nullable, default null, optional) is completely opaque — the description never hints at its purpose or when to supply it versus leave it null.

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: remove a player from the watchlist. The inverse relationship with the scout_player sibling is implicit but unmistakable, so an agent can identify the operation without reading the 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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should be called when the user wants off a watchlist, with scout_player as the obvious counterpart. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or mention of siblings like get_scouted_players to verify existing entries.

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