faceit_getLeagueSeason

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 does not disclose any behavioral traits such as being read-only, destructive, or requiring specific permissions. The tool's safe, read-only nature is implied but not stated, leaving agents uncertain about side effects.

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, with two short paragraphs. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second provides endpoint and parameter details. Every sentence adds value, though the 'Returns: Season details' line is vague but brief.

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 simple retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and required inputs. However, it lacks details on return structure, pagination, or error conditions, which would help an agent fully understand the tool's output. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only provides types and required status. The description adds that both parameters are path parameters (league_id string, season_id integer) and are required, which adds basic meaning beyond the schema. However, there is no further detail on valid values or formatting, so it does not fully compensate for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 retrieves details of a season within a league on FACEIT, using the verb 'retrieve' and specifying the resource as 'season'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like faceit_getLeagueById (which gets league details) and faceit_getPlayerForLeagueSeason (player-specific), making the purpose 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?

The description gives basic usage context: 'Use to fetch one season of a league'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools. The guidance is minimal and implicit.

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