Find an event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds real value beyond them: it discloses the quota cost model ('every event returned counts as one object against the key's monthly allowance') and the practical effect of omitting league_id. It stops short of disclosing pagination or result ordering beyond the name-free fallback.

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?

Purpose and example queries are front-loaded, followed by return contents and then cost/parameter guidance; every sentence carries information. It is slightly dense but no sentence is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating what is returned (start times in local and UTC, event IDs, best head-to-head price per side), plus quota mechanics and the no-team fallback. An agent has enough to call and interpret the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema documents defaults for limit and days_ahead; baseline would be 3. The description adds rationale the schema lacks, explaining that passing league_id 'keeps the search small' and what happens with an empty team query, which meaningfully clarifies why the optional parameters matter.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (upcoming events/games) and clarifies the input style ('from a plain question such as...'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_odds, best_price, and list_leagues, which serve different retrieval purposes.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use context: pass league_id whenever the league is known, and it explains the fallback behavior when no team is named. It does not explicitly name the sibling tools or state when to prefer them over find_event, so it stops short of a full when/when-not/alternatives treatment.

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