get_league_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so description must carry behavioral transparency. It only states the tool gets configuration, but discloses no behavioral traits like idempotency, rate limits, or side effects. Since it is a read operation, these are missing.

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?

Single sentence with verb front-loaded. No unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Has output schema, so return values need not be described. Two parameters with defaults and clear schema descriptions. However, without annotations, behavioral cues like idempotency or read-only nature would improve completeness.

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 schema already documents league_id and season_year. Description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond summarizing output. Baseline 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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'league configuration', listing examples like scoring categories, roster settings, and league rules. It clearly conveys purpose and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_team or get_standings, though does not explicitly differentiate from them.

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?

Description implies usage context by stating it retrieves league settings, but does not provide explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives. For example, it could mention that this is for overall league info rather than team-specific data.

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