List Competitions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions filtering by season and organiser, adding some behavioral context beyond 'list'. However, it does not disclose pagination, ordering, limits, or default behavior when no filters are provided. The description is adequate but lacks depth.

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 sentence, very concise. It front-loads the action and resource. No wasted words, though it can be slightly improved by structuring the filter options.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return format, behavior with no filters, or how it differs from similar list tools. The tool has moderate complexity, and the description falls short.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'season and organiser filters', covering two of four parameters ('seasonId' and 'organiser'). But 'current' and 'official' are not explained, leaving half the parameters unclear.

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 'list' and resource 'competitions', with filters for season and organiser. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_competition' (single) and 'list_seasons' (different resource). However, it could more explicitly state that it returns multiple competitions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as 'get_competition' for a single competition or 'search_entities' for broader searches. The context is implied but not explicit.

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