sm_odds_prematch

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only lists modes without disclosing data freshness, pagination, error behavior, or side effects. The read-only nature is only implied by 'Get', not explicitly stated.

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: first states purpose, second lists modes and a use case. Dense and front-loaded with no filler.

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?

Covers basic purpose and modes, but lacks guidance on mapping modes to parameters, response format, or pagination. With six parameters and no output schema, more detail would materially improve usability.

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 50% and the description lists mode values that hint at parameter combinations (fixture, bookmaker, market). However, it does not explain which parameters each mode requires or add semantics beyond the schema's enum.

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 opens with a specific verb phrase 'Get pre-match odds from SportMonks', clearly identifying the resource and scoping it to pre-match. The list of four modes adds further specificity and differentiates from sibling sm_odds_inplay.

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 a concrete use case: 'Useful for comparing with The Odds API data'. It implies when to use by the 'pre-match' qualifier, though it does not explicitly exclude in-play or name alternatives.

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