Get Teams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so description carries lower burden. It adds behavioral context by specifying output details (FIFA ranking, flag emoji) and available filters, consistent with a read-only query.

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 front-loaded sentences with no wasted text. First sentence states purpose, second lists filters and output, making it efficient and scannable.

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?

For a tool with 3 optional params and no output schema, the description adequately conveys filters and output fields. It does not explicitly mention return format (e.g., list vs. single object), but the context implies a list.

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%; description adds no new semantic meaning beyond listing the filters in natural language, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 queries FIFA World Cup 2026 teams, specifies resources (teams) and verb (query), lists filter criteria, and mentions returned details. It distinguishes from siblings like get_team_profile by focusing on list queries.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool (query teams with filters), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools like get_team_profile or get_groups.

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