get_my_current_team

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing the authentication requirement and that it reflects pending changes and per-player purchase/selling prices. It doesn't cover failure modes or rate limits, but for a read-only operation this is adequate context.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose, and the contrast with get_my_team is valuable. However, the 'Returns' line largely duplicates the first sentence's list of prices, chips, and transfer state, creating minor redundancy that keeps it from a perfect score.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, this description is fully complete: it defines the tool's purpose, explains how it differs from get_my_team, notes the authentication requirement, and lists the key returned elements (squad, prices, chips, transfer status).

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 the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics, and the empty schema is trivially complete, leaving no gap for the description to fill.

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 verb and resource: 'Get your current team as shown on the transfers page'. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling get_my_team by referencing the authenticated my-team endpoint and pending changes, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

It directly contrasts with get_my_team, giving a clear reason to use this tool when you need pending changes and per-player prices from the transfers page. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention other alternatives, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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