Dernier résultat d'équipe

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns the last match of a single team, and warns about needing a precise team number. No contradiction with annotations.

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 very concise, with 3 short sentences. The key purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds essential information without fluff.

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 presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral context: what the tool does, its singularity constraint, and when to resolve team ambiguity. It lacks mention of error conditions, but the output schema likely covers return values.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the 'categorie' and 'numero_equipe' parameters to the recommendation to use ffbb_resolve_team for ambiguous cases, and by clarifying the singular nature.

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 the last match played for a single precise team, using the verb 'retourne' and specifying 'SINGULIER UNIQUEMENT'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ffbb_next_match (which returns next match) and ffbb_resolve_team (which resolves team ambiguity).

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?

Explicitly states the tool works only for a single team ('SINGULIER UNIQUEMENT') and recommends calling ffbb_resolve_team first if the category is imprecise or lacks a number. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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