sleeper_league_matchups

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get matchups' with no information about rate limits, authentication, error handling, or whether the operation is read-only. This is a significant gap.

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 captures the tool's purpose. It avoids redundancy but could benefit from slight expansion without becoming verbose.

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 and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to mention return format, error cases, or limitations, leaving the agent without essential context for usage.

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 two parameters (league_id, week) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no additional meaning or context about these parameters (e.g., format, constraints, or how matchups are defined).

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 explicitly states the action ('get matchups'), the resource ('Sleeper fantasy league'), and the scope ('week'). This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools like sleeper_league (league info) and sleeper_league_rosters (rosters).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools for other Sleeper operations exist (e.g., sleeper_league, sleeper_players), but the description does not help the agent decide which tool to invoke.

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