VoxBall · the fans' verdict

Find a match

search_matches

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find football matches that have a VoxBall verdict (man of the match voted by fans), by team, optional opponent and optional day. Accepts usual names and abbreviations (PSG, Barça, Man City). Returns match ids for get_match_verdict, most recent first. Only matches whose vote has closed are listed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "team": "<team>"
    },
    "name": "search_matches"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	Optional: the day of the match, YYYY-MM-DD (Paris time).
`team`	Yes	A team that played the match, e.g. "Brighton", "PSG", "France".
`limit`	No	Default 10.
`language`	No	Language of the answer sentence and of the page links. Default: en.
`opponent`	No	Optional: the other team.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description rightly spends its budget elsewhere: result ordering ("most recent first"), the shape of the return (match ids, not verdicts), and a non-obvious coverage limit (closed votes only). That last point is a real behavioral constraint an agent could not infer from the schema or annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the input tolerance, then the return contract and eligibility filter. No sentence is redundant and nothing is buried.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so (match ids, most recent first). For a five-parameter lookup tool, the combination of purpose, input tolerance, eligibility rule, and hand-off to get_match_verdict leaves nothing an agent needs unclear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema does not: team inputs tolerate "usual names and abbreviations (PSG, Barça, Man City)", which tells an agent it need not canonicalize before calling. Opponent and day are only echoed at a high level, and limit/language are left entirely to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Find football matches") plus the qualifying scope ("that have a VoxBall verdict... voted by fans"), and names the constraint pair team/opponent/day. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling by saying it returns ids for get_match_verdict rather than the verdicts themselves.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The sentence "Returns match ids for get_match_verdict" makes the intended pipeline explicit: this tool resolves a match, then the sibling fetches the verdict. It also gives an eligibility rule ("Only matches whose vote has closed are listed"). What's missing is an explicit exclusion, e.g. what to do when the vote is still open or when no match is found.

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

All VoxBall · the fans' verdict tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?