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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it only discloses the match-state filter. It says nothing about pagination, default result count, authentication, or ordering, all of which matter for a listing tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The scope qualifiers are packed efficiently without redundancy.

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 no-required-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential scope, but it omits the only parameter's behavior and any pagination/result-size context, leaving gaps the agent cannot fill elsewhere.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single parameter (limit) is not mentioned at all in the description, so neither the schema nor the text explains its meaning, default, or bounds. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the bare field name.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (matches) with scoping detail: open, active, completed, and public, which tells the agent what subset is returned. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the similarly named colosseum_list_matches sibling, so the agent must infer the difference from the prefix.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as chess_list_tournaments or colosseum_list_matches. The usage is only implied by the verb, leaving the agent to guess the context.

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