List live and recent matches for a sport. Returns up to limit matches with scores, status, kickoff time and team logos. Good default for 'what's happening in football right now?'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| sport | Yes | Sport to query. One of football, basketball, cricket, tennis. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Mentions returned fields (scores, status, kickoff time, logos) and limit. Does not clarify what 'recent' means, if future matches are included, or ordering.
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?
Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with action and returns. Second sentence adds a practical use case. Highly efficient.
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?
No output schema, but description lists return fields. Lacks response structure details and error handling. For a simple list tool, it's nearly complete. Low complexity (2 params) helps.
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 50% (only sport has description). Description adds 'Returns up to limit matches', explaining limit's effect, but no detail on default or max/min beyond schema defaults. Baseline 3 with partial compensation.
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?
Description clearly states the verb 'list', resource 'matches', and scope 'live and recent for a sport'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_match_detail (single match) and get_bracket (tournament).
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?
Provides a clear use case: 'Good default for what's happening in football right now?', implying it's for overview. However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool names, though sibling context exists.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of sports data: brackets, match details, match lists, players, standings, team schedules, top scorers, and live trackers. No functional overlap exists.
All tools follow a consistent 'get_<descriptive_noun>' pattern in snake_case, making the set predictable and easy to navigate.
With 8 tools, the surface covers a broad range of sports queries without being overwhelming. Each tool serves a clear purpose.
Covers core workflows (matches, standings, players, schedules, brackets, scorers, live tracking). Lacks a direct search for slugs of teams/players/leagues, relying on get_matches results, which is a minor gap.
