remove_league

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses a key side effect (board cache preserved) and explains why, which is valuable. It does not explicitly state irreversibility, but 'Delete' inherently signals that.

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?

Exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a relevant caveat. Every word adds value, no filler or repetition.

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 1-parameter delete tool, the description covers the action, scope, and an important side effect. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. It is complete for safe 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies the 'name' parameter is the league name ('Delete a league'), but does not explicitly state that the parameter is 'name' or add details like type or format. This is adequate but not rich.

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 verb 'Delete' and the resource 'a league and its draft history', making the action unambiguous. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'reset_draft' or 'switch_league' by specifying the deletion scope.

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 implies when to use it (to permanently remove a league) and provides a clear exclusion: the board cache is left alone. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to select it over related tools.

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