Get Sport By Slug

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 by structured data. The description adds one useful behavioral fact beyond that: the response embeds all leagues for the sport. It does not disclose what happens on an unknown slug (error vs empty result) or whether the lookup is cached.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the key information (slug lookup plus attached leagues) is front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage this is close to sufficient, and the description usefully states that leagues are attached to the result, partly compensating for the missing output schema. A little more on the returned sport fields or not-found behavior would make it 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% and the single parameter is documented as "Sport slug", so the schema already does the work. The description only restates that the lookup keys on a slug, adding no format, casing, or disambiguation details. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Retrieve") and resource ("a sport by its slug") and adds the payload shape ("with all leagues attached"). It does not distinguish itself from near-duplicate siblings such as get_sports or get_all_sports, so an agent must infer that this is the single-item slug lookup.

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 description contains no when-to-use guidance and names no alternative, which matters here because the sibling list contains get_sports, get_all_sports, get_league_by_slug and get_events_by_sport_slug. The only implicit signal is that a slug is required, leaving the agent to infer when a slug lookup beats a listing call.

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