get_league_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is unambiguous. The description adds useful behavioral context about the returned data shape (all users, specific fields). It does not contradict annotations and provides additional value beyond the structured hints.

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 compact and well-structured: it opens with the core function, lists output fields, then gives usage guidance. Each sentence serves a purpose, and the critical information is front-loaded with no redundancy.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential output structure and workflow context: where to get the input and how to use the output with another tool. Nothing crucial is missing for correct invocation.

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 single parameter league_id has a complete schema description (100% coverage) and the description repeats that it comes from get_user_leagues. While this reinforces the source, it adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns all users in a Sleeper league and lists the specific fields included (user_id, username, display name, avatar, commissioner status, team metadata). It also names how to obtain the league_id and references a sibling (get_league_rosters) for combination, distinguishing its purpose from other tools.

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 explicitly instructs to obtain league_id from get_user_leagues and tells when to combine results with get_league_rosters (for standings, team labels, manager summaries). This gives clear when-to-use and integration guidance without leaving inference to the agent.

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