List today's games

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It adds behavioral detail: 'Live games first' (ordering) and 'with player props' (inclusion of props in response). No contradictions, but could mention rate limits or pagination.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. First sentence states purpose and scope; second adds ordering and sport list. Highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (1 optional param, no output schema), the description covers purpose, supported sports, default behavior, and ordering. Sibling tools are distinct, and no additional information is needed for a list operation.

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% for the single parameter 'sport'. The description adds default behavior ('Defaults to the in-season sport'), which is not in the schema description. This enhances understanding beyond the 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 states 'List today's games with player props for a sport', clearly identifying the verb (List), resource (today's games), and scope (with player props, specific sports). It distinguishes from siblings like find_game (searches a specific game) and get_game_props (retrieves props for a game).

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 usage for getting a list of today's games with props, mentioning supported sports, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No direct reference to siblings or when-not-to-use.

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