Get All Sports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond them — no note on whether the result is cached, ordered, paginated, or how large the catalog typically is, which is the kind of context that would earn credit.

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 four-word sentence with the verb front-loaded and zero waste. It is not padded, though its terseness borders on under-specification rather than disciplined brevity.

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 parameterless read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient, but it should at least clarify the relationship to get_sports and what a 'sport' record is (slug, name) so the agent knows how to chain into get_events_by_sport_slug. That unresolved sibling ambiguity is the main completeness gap.

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 and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to explain. The baseline of 4 applies; nothing in the description misrepresents the no-argument nature of the call.

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?

"Retrieve all sports" names a clear verb and resource, so the basic purpose is unambiguous. However, the sibling list contains both get_sports and get_sport_by_slug, and this description does nothing to explain how 'all sports' differs from the sibling get_sports — the agent cannot tell which to pick without opening schemas.

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?

No when-to-use guidance at all: nothing says whether this is a catalog enumeration to call before get_events_by_sport_slug, or how it relates to get_sports / get_all_leagues. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so the choice between the near-duplicate siblings is left entirely to inference.

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