List federations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "List" signals a read-only, no-argument operation, but nothing is said about the shape of results (likely id/name pairs) or whether a federation id is required to call list_districts/list_competitions.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the parenthetical examples earn their space by disambiguating the domain-specific term "federation." No filler.

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?

For a trivial zero-parameter list tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema the description never indicates what comes back (identifiers vs. names) or how that output feeds the sibling browse tools, which is the main thing an agent needs to proceed.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline of 4 applies. The description's examples describe the resource domain rather than arguments.

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?

States a clear verb and resource ("List the sports federations on Profixio") and grounds the abstract term "federation" with concrete examples (SHF, SVBF). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_districts and list_competitions, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

"Start here to browse" implies this is the entry point of a hierarchy and the downstream siblings (districts, competitions) follow, but the when/when-not conditions and the chaining path are only implied, not stated.

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