createapps_championship

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

Description discloses specific details about the championship cycle, prize amounts, categories, and event dates. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not mention whether the data is static or updated, nor any authentication or rate limits. Still, it gives useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and provides specific details without waste. Every sentence adds value.

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 zero parameters and existence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context about the championship details. It covers key facts without needing to explain return values, as output schema handles that.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is trivial. Description adds value by detailing what the tool returns, compensating for the lack of parameters. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns Create Apps Championship details for the current cycle, with specific details about prize pool, categories, dates, and venue. No sibling tool duplicates this purpose.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. While the purpose is clear, it doesn't mention alternatives or prerequisites. Since no similar sibling exists, the implied usage is sufficient but not explicit.

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