sleeper: Get league

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that it returns settings, scoring, roster positions, and status, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits or data freshness. With annotations covering safety, the additional disclosure is adequate but minimal.

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 of 12 words, front-loading the purpose and key details. Every word is necessary, with no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and what details are returned. It could be more complete by mentioning the return format or potential constraints, but it is sufficient for a basic retrieval tool.

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 100% description coverage with 'League id (from sleeper_get_user_leagues)'. The description does not add any further semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not improve it.

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 'Get' and the resource 'Sleeper league', listing specific details like settings, scoring, roster positions, and status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on specific aspects like rosters or matchups.

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 implies usage by mentioning the league_id comes from sleeper_get_user_leagues, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sleeper_get_league_rosters or sleeper_get_league_users. The context is clear but not directive.

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