faceit_getTournament

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only states it retrieves details and gives the endpoint. It does not disclose missing tournament behavior, authorization needs, rate limits, or any 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 brief and well-structured: a one-liner, usage condition, endpoint, parameter list, and return statement. No unnecessary words.

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 lack of output schema, the return is only described as 'Tournament details', which is vague. It could be more specific about the structure. The description is adequate for a simple retrieval but lacks completeness in return documentation.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `expanded` can be used to inline organizer and game. The schema has no parameter descriptions, so the description compensates well. It could further specify expandable entities.

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 action: 'Retrieve tournament details'. It specifies the endpoint and the prerequisite of having a tournament_id. This distinguishes it from siblings like faceit_getTournamentBrackets or faceit_searchTournaments.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when you already have a tournament_id.' Also mentions the `expanded` parameter for inlining organizer and game. However, it does not mention when not to use it or direct alternatives like faceit_searchTournaments if the ID is unknown.

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