transfer_suggestions

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It describes input parameters but does not specify what the output contains (e.g., list of players, expected points, costs). It does not mention read-only nature, permissions, or rate limits. Adequate but lacks detail on return value.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then parameter details. Every sentence is informative and necessary. No redundancy or fluff. Length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given there is no output schema, description covers purpose, usage, and parameters well but omits description of the output format (e.g., what recommendations look like). For a tool returning suggestions, this is a notable gap. Otherwise complete for the simple parameter set.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description compensates fully. It explains team_id as 'the number in your FPL URL', free_transfers as 'Number of free transfers available (1 or 2)' with default, and bank with example 'e.g. 1.5 means 1.5m' and defaults. Provides meaningful context beyond schema.

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 'Get transfer recommendations for a specific FPL team' with explicit verb and resource, and gives example user queries. It distinguishes from sibling tool fpl_manager_hub by recommending it for full analysis.

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 states when to use ('USE THIS WHEN the user asks...') and provides specific example queries. Also advises preferring fpl_manager_hub for a full analysis, offering a clear when-not guideline.

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