get_draft_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Get') and describes the return type as a dictionary with draft status, picks, and state. It also notes authentication needs for private leagues via cookies, adding some context, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or discuss error behavior.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: a single-purpose opening sentence, followed by a clear list of arguments and a returns statement. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or fluff.

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 simple read-only status tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, parameters, auth, and return type. It could provide more detail on what 'draft status' includes beyond picks and progress, but it is largely complete for this tool's complexity.

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?

The input schema has zero descriptions, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: league_id, year, espn_s2, and swid, including env var fallbacks, defaults, and purpose. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states 'Get current draft status including all picks and progress,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools focused on schedules, teams, rosters, free agents, and matchups.

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 implies use when you need draft status but provides no explicit guidance on when to use alternatives or when not to use this tool. It mentions optional parameters and env var fallbacks, giving some context, but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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