openliga_get_current_matchday

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a read operation ('get') but does not cover aspects like required authentication, rate limits, or the structure of the returned data. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent what it does and the input needed. However, it lacks any description of the return format or additional behavioral context, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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% (one parameter with a concise description and example). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Given high coverage, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action: retrieving matches for the current matchday of a league. It is specific and uses a direct verb-resource pair. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like openliga_get_matches_by_matchday, which could be used for a specific matchday. This lack of differentiation keeps it from a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as openliga_get_matches_by_matchday for a specific matchday or openliga_get_matches_by_league_season for the entire season. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent without clear contextual direction.

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