League fixtures and results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results are returned round by round, paging moves one round at a time, and each match carries an id for v3_match. It says nothing about result volume, ordering within a round, or limits beyond the schema's skip maximum, so the addition is useful but not rich.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by usage examples and the paging recipe. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; there is no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description does cover the essentials of the return value (round-by-round scores and dates, match ids for follow-up) and the paging model for a five-parameter read tool. It stops short of describing how rounds are grouped or ordered in the response, which would matter for an agent assembling multiple pages.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema does not: skip=9 corresponds to roughly one round, and the which values are meant to be used in a current-then-page sequence. That operationalizes two of the five parameters rather than restating their enum definitions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a league's matches round by round') plus what is returned (scores of played rounds, dates of upcoming ones), which is enough to separate it from v3_match and v3_team_matches. It does not explicitly contrast itself with v3_scores, whose name overlaps with the 'scores of played rounds' phrasing, so the sibling differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Gives concrete user-intent examples ('next round of La Liga', 'results of week 10') and an explicit call sequence: start with which="current", then page with which="upcoming" or "results". It lacks an explicit when-not or a named alternative (e.g. v3_team_matches for a single club), so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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