Get event standings

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it states ordering (best first), includes seed data for visibility of upsets, and implies support for both final and current placements. These details go beyond the annotation and help an agent anticipate the output format.

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 with no redundancy: the first states the core purpose, the second adds a distinctive detail (seed inclusion), and the third provides a practical usage tip. The most important info is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 read-only tool with a detailed schema (including locator alternatives and pagination controls), the description is reasonably complete. It does not describe the exact return structure, but since there is no output schema and the tool's purpose is straightforward, this is not a critical gap. The usage tip and detail about seeds round out the essential context.

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 all parameters already have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds only the perPage usage tip, which is helpful but does not significantly expand on parameter meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the description adds marginal value over the 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 the tool retrieves an event's standings with final or current placements, ordered best first, and includes seed information. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like get_event or get_event_entrants, which serve different purposes.

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 provides a concrete usage hint ('Use perPage 8 for Top 8') that gives practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool compared to similar ones like get_event_entrants, though the purpose is clear enough to infer appropriate use.

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