prewarm

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the cost model (first query expensive, subsequent cached) and implies a heavy operation by suggesting to run it an hour before. It doesn't mention auth or destructive effects, but the cache-building behavior and timing are well explained.

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, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence adds value. The metaphor 'nothing computes while you're on the clock' is engaging and memorable, and the timing guidance is clear.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, no required args). The description covers the purpose and timing well. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., league must be selected), but for the tool's scope, it is reasonably complete, especially with an output schema present.

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 only parameter 'verbose' is not mentioned in the description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description should have indicated what verbose does (e.g., enabling output) since the schema itself offers no description. This is a clear gap, though the parameter is simple.

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's purpose: 'Build every cache before draft day' — a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on pre-draft cache warming rather than league configuration, picks, or reports.

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?

Explicit usage timing is given: 'Run this an hour before your draft, not during it.' It also explains the rationale (first query pays for download/modeling, subsequent queries served from memory), making it clear when and why to use this tool.

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