get_double_gameweeks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type ('Information about double gameweeks and affected teams') and that it checks upcoming gameweeks, but does not mention authentication requirements, edge cases (e.g., empty results), or potential side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured, with an introductory sentence followed by clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the purpose, parameter, and return value. Minor gaps like return format details prevent a perfect score, but nothing critical is missing.

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 input schema has zero description coverage, but the description's Args section fully explains the parameter: 'num_gameweeks: Number of upcoming gameweeks to check (default: 5)'. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, making the parameter's purpose and default clear.

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's function: 'Get information about upcoming double gameweeks where teams play multiple times.' It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('double gameweeks'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_blank_gameweeks.

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?

The description implies usage for checking upcoming double gameweeks, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, so it misses the exclusionary guidance needed for a 5.

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