Get Events By Sport Slug

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. What it does add is genuinely useful beyond the annotations: the tool fans out across all leagues and then their active series, meaning the result is an aggregate and only covers active series. That fan-out cost and the active-only scope are disclosed nowhere else.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler. The action and the slug parameter come first, and the aggregation mechanics follow as supporting detail.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must indicate what comes back; it does say 'returns combined events,' though it does not describe the event shape or ordering. For a simple lookup tool with a fully documented schema and strong annotations, that is nearly complete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents slug, query.type, limit, offset, section, and excludeEventId. The description only restates the slug examples, which is redundant, and adds nothing about the nested query options. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve events for a sport by its slug') and adds the mechanism: it fetches all leagues for the sport, collects their active series, and returns combined events. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the near-identical sibling get_events_by_league_slug, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The slug examples ('football', 'basketball') imply the use case, but there is no statement of when to choose this tool over get_events, get_events_by_league_slug, or get_sports_events, all of which are present in the sibling list. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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