Get League Transactions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, etc. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, such as the return format (list with type, adds, drops, etc.) and mapping of round to NFL week. No contradictions.

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 concise and well-structured: a brief purpose statement, bulleted args, returns, and examples. Every sentence adds value with no filler.

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 read tool with 2 parameters, full schema coverage, and informative annotations, the description provides a complete picture of what the tool does and returns, including examples. No gaps.

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% with basic descriptions. The main description adds minimal extra information (e.g., round corresponds to NFL week, examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 gets all transactions for a specific round/week in a league, listing types like trades, waiver claims, and free agent adds/drops. It is distinct from sibling tools like sleeper_get_league_traded_picks which focus on traded picks only.

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 explicit context on when to use (e.g., 'Get all transactions for a specific round/week') and includes examples like 'What trades happened in week 8?'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, so it is slightly lacking in exclusion guidance.

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