Cito API

leaderboard_tiebreak_win_pct

Read-only

Tennis season tiebreak-win-pct leaderboard: Share of classic 7-point tiebreaks won per player, from real match-set aggregates, ordered highest pct first.

When to use:

Share of classic 7-point tiebreaks won per player, from real match-set aggregates, ordered highest pct first. season tables; clutch/serve-efficiency leader queries.

Prefer over: raw leaderboard via call_api for agent-normalized rows.

Do not use when: ranking position → standings with game tennis; week-over-week movement → rankings_movers; one player's recent form → player_form.

Tennis-only. Season defaults to 2026; tour (ATP|WTA) is optional — omit it for the combined board. Only players contesting at least 10 tiebreaks qualify.

Parallel-safe: yes. Upstream cost: 1.

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": {
      "game": "<game>"
    },
    "name": "leaderboard_tiebreak_win_pct"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`game`	Yes	Game title: lol \| cs2 \| dota2 \| cod \| ufc \| tennis \| valorant. Example: "cs2".
`tour`	No	ATP or WTA tour; omit for the combined board. Synonym: division.
`limit`	No	Max items to return (default 10, max 100). Example: 10.
`season`	No	Season year (YYYY). Default 2026.
`division`	No	Synonym for tour (ATP or WTA), matching the standings tool spelling.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	true if the tool succeeded
`data`	No	Result payload when ok is true; null on error
`meta`	Yes
`error`	No
`partial`	No
`pagination`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / game / description

Previous value: -"Game title: lol | cs2 | dota2 | cod | ufc | tennis. Example: \"cs2\"."New value: +"Game title: lol | cs2 | dota2 | cod | ufc | tennis | valorant. Example: \"cs2\"."

changedInput schema / properties / game / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "lol",
-  "cs2",
-  "dota2",
-  "cod",
-  "ufc",
-  "tennis"
-]New value: +[
+  "lol",
+  "cs2",
+  "dota2",
+  "cod",
+  "ufc",
+  "tennis",
+  "valorant"
+]

AddedSep 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 readOnlyHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: tennis-only scope, a minimum-volume qualification rule ('at least 10 tiebreaks'), the season default, and operational metadata ('Parallel-safe: yes. Upstream cost: 1'). Return shape and pagination/error behavior are not described, but an output schema is supplied, so that gap is minor.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the definition and cleanly sectioned into when/prefer/do-not-use. However, the opening sentence is repeated almost verbatim as the first bullet under 'When to use', which is wasted space in an otherwise tight definition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema covering return values, the description is nearly complete for a filtered leaderboard query. The one thing an agent must infer is that the required 'game' argument should be 'tennis' for this tennis-only tool; everything else an agent needs to invoke it correctly is present.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3 and the schema already explains game/tour/limit/season/division. The description contributes added meaning by clarifying that tour is optional and omitting it yields a combined board, and by introducing the 10-tiebreak qualification filter that is not expressible as a parameter. It does not state that the required 'game' parameter must be set to 'tennis' despite the tennis-only scope, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource combination ('Tennis season tiebreak-win-pct leaderboard') plus scope ('Share of classic 7-point tiebreaks won per player'), data source ('real match-set aggregates') and sort order ('ordered highest pct first'). This is immediately distinguishable from the many other leaderboard_* siblings that cover aces, break conversion, first serve won, etc.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly structured as when-to-use, prefer-over, and do-not-use-when, with named alternatives for each exclusion: standings for ranking position, rankings_movers for week-over-week, player_form for a single player, and call_api for the raw leaderboard. An agent can route without opening any other definition.

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

All Cito API 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?