get_gameweek_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions 'Returns: Detailed information' but does not describe the exact fields, the meaning of 'precise status', or whether the data is read-only. No details about potential errors or data freshness are given.

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 short but redundant: 'Detailed information about gameweek timing, including exact status' largely restates the first sentence. The Returns section adds minimal new value, making the structure slightly inefficient.

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's mention of 'detailed information about gameweek timing, including exact status' is the only clue about return content. This is sufficient for a zero-parameter tool but lacks specifics on date formats, status values, or how it differs from live scores. Given the tool's simplicity, it is minimally adequate.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is required since there are no inputs to document.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'current, previous, and next gameweeks', making the tool's core purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like get_gameweek_live_scores, but the scope is unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_gameweek_live_scores or get_blank_gameweeks. The description states only what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name.

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