get_standings_by_season_id

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

No annotations are provided. The description lacks behavioral context beyond the basic retrieve action. It does not disclose whether the response is paginated, the extent of included data, or any side effects.

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 a single concise sentence but lacks additional context that would help an agent. It is not overly verbose, but it does not maximize its conciseness with valuable information.

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 the complexity of 5 parameters, lack of output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return format, customization options hinted by params, or how it differs from other standings tools.

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 100% with descriptions for all 5 params. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 3 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'full league standings table' with scope 'for a season'. It is unambiguous but does not differentiate from siblings like get_standings_by_round_id or get_grouped_standings_by_round_id.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other standings-related siblings. No mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions.

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