sportsdb: Search teams

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint). The description adds context about the return content (basic info, badges, stadium details), which is helpful but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output. Every word is necessary, with no redundancy.

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 (single parameter, no output schema, straightforward read operation), the description fully covers what an agent needs: what it does, what it searches by, and what it returns. No gaps remain.

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?

There is only one parameter (team_name) with a clear schema description. Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add extra meaning. It adequately aligns with the parameter purpose, though no additional details like case sensitivity or fuzzy search behavior are provided.

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 ('Search teams by name') and the resource ('teams'), and specifies the return content ('basic info, badges, and stadium details'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sportsdb_get_team_details by focusing on search by name.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sportsdb_get_team_details or sportsdb_search_players). There is no mention of when not to use it or under what conditions it is appropriate.

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