faceit_getOrganizerChampionships

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

The description reveals the HTTP method (GET), pagination parameters (offset, limit), sorting, and filtering (published_only), which are behavioral traits. Without annotations, it does well, but does not explicitly state read-only or authentication requirements.

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 appropriately concise with a summary, usage hint, endpoint, and parameter list. The parameter list is clear but could be more structured (e.g., using a table). Still, every sentence adds value.

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 complexity (pagination, sorting) and the absence of an output schema, the description is minimal on return value ('Championships list'). It could provide more detail on the response structure or common fields.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, location, type, and constraints (e.g., 'published_only: When set to true only published championships are retrieved', 'limit: min 1, max 100'). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Retrieve all championships of an organizer' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like faceit_getChampionships (general) and faceit_getOrganizerTournaments (different resource) by focusing on championships and requiring an organizer_id.

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 explicitly says 'Use to list championships run by a known organizer', providing clear context for when to invoke. However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusions, though the sibling list makes it obvious.

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