openliga_get_last_match_by_team

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely states the tool's function without mentioning error handling, data freshness, or what happens if no match exists. The description lacks depth for full transparency.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides a necessary prerequisite. No fluff, front-loaded, and efficient.

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 simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it does and how to get the required input. It is adequately complete for its complexity, though it omits details about the return format or error scenarios.

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?

The input schema has one required parameter (team_id) with full coverage (100%). The description adds value by directing the user to 'get_teams' for valid IDs, which compensates for the schema's minimal description. Helpful context beyond the schema definition.

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 retrieves the last completed match for a team, using a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'last completed match'. It also references a helper tool 'get_teams' for finding IDs, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'openliga_get_next_match_by_team'.

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 a usage hint to use 'get_teams' for finding team IDs, indicating a prerequisite. While it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when to avoid this tool, the context of 'last completed match' relative to siblings implies appropriate usage. Slightly implicit but clear enough.

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