sportsrc_get_sports

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

The description mentions the tool returns IDs, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose potential behaviors like caching, ordering, or whether the list is dynamic. Since there are no annotations, the description carries the full burden but is minimally adequate.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a practical note about the output. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly concise.

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, parameter-less tool that returns a list, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does and the significance of its output. No further details are necessary given the low complexity and absence of output schema.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining that the return value consists of IDs usable in other tools. This is helpful context beyond the empty schema.

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 lists sport categories supported by SportSRC, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sportsrc_get_leagues by focusing on sports categories rather than leagues.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating the output (IDs) can be passed to other tools, indicating when to use it (to get sport IDs). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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