search_leagues

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

With no annotations, the description only implies a non-mutating read through 'Search' and 'list'. The client-side filtering note is useful, non-obvious behavior, but its consequences for result completeness or performance and any result limits or pagination remain undisclosed.

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?

Two short sentences front-load the operation and then state the important parameter interaction, with no filler. The compact slash-heavy wording remains readily interpretable for this small 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?

For a simple three-parameter lookup, this is sufficient for a basic name search or filtered list, and the client-side filtering caveat is valuable. Without annotations or an output schema, however, no-argument behavior, country value conventions, result caps or pagination, and response expectations remain unresolved.

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 partly compensates for the 33% schema coverage by assigning query to league/cup names and country/season to listing or post-search filtering. It still leaves the expected country format and independent use of country and season unclear, while adding no parameter detail beyond those roles and their interaction.

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 opening sentence gives specific operations and a resource: searching leagues/cups by name or listing them by country/season. This distinguishes it in substance from siblings such as search_teams and standings, although it does not explicitly route between alternatives.

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 identifies two usage modes and explains that country/season remain applicable as client-side filters when query is present. It does not explain whether a no-argument call is useful, whether country and season can be used independently, or when another sibling tool would be preferable.

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