Footdigest: a team's active injuries in a competition, player, type, status, and expected return. Give the competition slug and a team name.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| team | Yes | Team name, e.g. France. | |
| competition | Yes | Competition slug, e.g. world-cup-2026. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and the description only implies a read operation without disclosing permissions, side effects, or limitations.
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?
Single sentence with all necessary information, though the 'Footdigest:' prefix is unnecessary and slightly detracts from conciseness.
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?
Lists returned fields but lacks details on response structure or pagination; adequate for a simple two-parameter query tool.
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 clear parameter descriptions; the description adds minimal clarification (e.g., competition slug format).
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 it retrieves a team's active injuries, listing specific data fields. It distinguishes from siblings like get_suspension_watch and get_standings.
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?
Indicates when to use with 'Give the competition slug and a team name', but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
