List tournaments / competitions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true (may not exist). The description adds the critical behavioral detail that a one-time browser sign-in (specter_login) is required, which is beyond what annotations provide.

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 that front-load the core purpose and add valuable return info and a prerequisite. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the main purpose and a key requirement, but lacks detail on parameter behavior (e.g., pagination with limit, search behavior) and expected output format beyond ids/slugs. Given no output schema, more completeness would improve the tool's usability.

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?

With schema description coverage at only 33%, the description should compensate for missing parameter documentation, but it does not explain the 'limit' and 'search' parameters at all. Only 'projectId' has a description in the schema, but the description adds no parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states 'List the tournaments / competitions configured in this Specter project', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by being the only list tool for tournaments, and also mentions returning ids/slugs for referencing.

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?

Mentions that the tool returns ids/slugs useful for creating other entities, implying a typical use case before creating related entities. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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