list_active_contests

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

No annotations provided, but the description discloses that the tool returns contests currently open for entry and hints at the response containing time_remaining_seconds. It implies a read operation without side effects.

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?

Three short sentences with no unnecessary words, efficiently conveying essential information and front-loading the core purpose.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description provides useful behavioral clues (time_remaining_seconds) and context (typical number of contests). It sufficiently prepares the agent for a simple list operation.

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% with the track parameter described. The description adds value beyond the schema by noting typical counts per track and the 'Low entry count = better odds' insight.

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 it returns all active contests, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_contest_rules or get_leaderboard.

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?

Provides helpful context like typical number of active contests and that low entry count implies better odds, but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternative tools.

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