league_overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful behavioral facts not in the annotations: the fantasy week is in ET, and a 'freshness' indicator is returned. It does not describe pagination, caching, or response shape, which keeps it at a middling score.

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?

A single telegraphic fragment with zero waste and the primary resource ('League') front-loaded. The list style is compact but gives weak sentence structure and no hierarchy among the returned items.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description partially compensates by enumerating returned contents (teams, categories, roster slots, week, strategy, proposals, freshness). However, with no parameters and a crowded sibling set, it omits any routing context, leaving the agent unclear on when this is the right call over league_profile or context_pack.

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 nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies.

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 is a bare noun list ('League, teams, categories, roster slots, current fantasy week...') that implies an overview dump but never states a verb or the resource's purpose explicitly. An agent can infer it returns league context, but it cannot distinguish this from siblings like league_profile or context_pack without further inspection.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to the numerous overlapping siblings (league_profile, context_pack, standings, my_roster). The agent is left to guess which overview tool to call.

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