create_sport_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool creates settings and returns them, but does not disclose potential side effects, whether existing settings are overwritten, permissions required, or error behavior. This is a significant gap for a create/write operation.

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 efficiently formatted with separate Args and Returns sections. It is concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose. However, it redundantly lists parameter details already present in the schema, which could be trimmed without losing value.

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 tool has 5 parameters (1 required) and an output schema (not shown). The description covers all parameter meanings but lacks behavioral context such as idempotency, existence checks, or return value details. Given the moderate complexity and existing schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter names and brief explanations from the schema, adding only the word 'optional' for non-required fields. It does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema's existing descriptions.

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 the tool's function: 'Create new sport-specific settings.' The verb 'create' is specific and the resource is unambiguous, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_sport_settings, delete_sport_settings, and get_sport_settings.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to create new settings), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or situations where another tool (e.g., update_sport_settings) would be more appropriate. The existence of sibling tools is not referenced, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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