search_competitions

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Describes return of matching competitions with idCompetition, mentions raw parameter for untouched payload, but doesn't disclose other behaviors like error handling or rate limits.

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 concise sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with 'Start here.' and immediately states purpose, example, and key output. Optimal length.

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?

Description covers core purpose and critical output (idCompetition) but omits details like result limits, pagination, error responses, or behavior when no matches found. Minimal but functional for a simple search tool given no output schema.

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 coverage is 100% (all 3 parameters documented in schema). Description explains name parameter and idCompetition output but does not add extra meaning for 'raw' or 'language' beyond schema defaults. 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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Start here. Find a FIFA competition...' by name fragment, emphasizing its role as the entry point and that it returns idCompetition used by all other tools, distinguishing it from siblings.

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?

Explicitly says 'Start here' implying initial step, states output 'idCompetition that every other tool builds on', and gives example 'world cup'. However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives.

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