Games Get Calendar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the season-scope context and says nothing about response shape or whether the calendar is a fixed set of dates, which with no output schema is a modest gap.

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 no filler; the verb and scope come first. It is efficient, though it errs toward under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 read-only tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the essentials but omits the one param not documented in the schema (dates) and provides no differentiation from the league-events sibling. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 67%: sport and league carry example values in the schema, while 'dates' is undocumented in both schema and description. The phrase 'active event dates across a season' only loosely gestures at the dates parameter, so the description adds little meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 for partial coverage is appropriate.

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 (fetch) and resource (league schedule calendar / active event dates across a season), which distinguishes it from team-scoped tools like games_get_team_schedule. However, the boundary against close siblings such as games_get_league_events and games_get_scoreboard is left implicit, since 'calendar' vs 'events' is not differentiated in the text.

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 gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and names no alternative, despite ~32 sibling games_* tools including games_get_league_events and games_get_team_schedule. An agent must infer the selection rule entirely from the one-sentence purpose.

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