kenpom_slate

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behaviors. It mentions optional market odds and backtest feature but does not clarify side effects, prerequisites, or data freshness. The read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose and output. Every clause 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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details on parameter effects (e.g., k, home_adv) and output format. Does not explain how join_odds works or default behavior. Incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 100% schema coverage, parameters already have descriptions. The description adds context that the output is a full slate table and that backtest enables archive features, but does not significantly enhance parameter semantics beyond the 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 builds a full projection slate table for a date, specifying returns (projected scores, margins, win probabilities, optional market odds). This differentiates it from siblings like kenpom_predictions or kenpom_matchup by focusing on the full slate for a date.

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?

Only mentions using backtest=true for archive features, but no guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings like kenpom_predictions or kenpom_teams. No exclusions or alternatives provided.

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