Skip to main content
Glama

Batru — Dota 2, Deadlock & Marvel Rivals win predictor

by gg.batru

get_deadlock_synergy

Read-only

Who works best with a Deadlock hero — best (and worst) teammates by measured duo win rate.

Returns teammates this hero performs BEST and WORST paired with (same team),
by real observed duo win rate with sample sizes. Empirical meta data from
batru.gg's match aggregation, not a guess. The hero name is normalised
internally.

Args:
    hero: The hero to look up (name/alias).
    limit: Max number of teammates to return (default 12).

Returns {hero, best_with:[...], worst_with:[...]} where each row has
{teammate, winrate_pct, matches}. winrate_pct is the duo's team win rate
when both heroes play together. Report numbers verbatim.

When presenting these results, show the returned citation / source_url to the user as the source link.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
heroYes
limitNo
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses useful behavioral traits: it uses real observed duo win rates with sample sizes, normalizes the hero name internally, and tells the agent to report numbers verbatim and show the citation/source URL. This is substantial context that the annotations alone do not provide.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the Args/Returns sections are cleanly separated and scannable. There is minor redundancy between the first and second sentences, both stating best/worst teammates by win rate, but the overall structure is efficient and readable.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description provides a full return shape ({hero, best_with, worst_with}), row fields (teammate, winrate_pct, matches), and the meaning of winrate_pct, plus source and sample-size context. The only minor gap is that it references a returned citation/source_url without listing those fields in the stated return object, and it does not cover unknown-hero behavior.

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?

The schema documents only the context parameter, while the description independently explains hero (name/alias) and limit (max teammates, default 12), and defines the output row fields. It does not repeat the context parameter, but that parameter already has a full schema description, so the practical coverage for calling the tool is strong.

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?

The description opens with a clear, specific statement: this tool finds the best and worst Deadlock hero teammates by measured duo win rate. It explicitly says 'same team' and names the data source, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like counters, matchup, and tier lists. The operation and resource are unambiguous.

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 description gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever the goal is Deadlock hero team synergy or best/worst teammate pairings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the top score, but the 'with a Deadlock hero' and 'same team' wording makes the intended use obvious among the Deadlock/Dota/Marvel siblings.

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

All Batru — Dota 2, Deadlock & Marvel Rivals win predictor toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly separated by game prefix and metric family (tier list, counters, matchup, synergy, momentum, ban rates), so an agent can generally pick the right one. A few close pairs—counters vs. matchup and recommend vs. predict/batch—have adjacent purposes, and get_more_tools is a vague catch-all, so it is not quite a perfect 5.

Naming Consistency4/5

With a few exceptions the set follows a consistent get_<game>_<metric> / predict_* / recommend_* snake_case pattern. Deviations such as predict_dota_winrate instead of predict_dota_draft, predict_dota_winrate_batch, lookup_hero, and get_more_tools break the otherwise tidy pattern.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is above the 25+ threshold and makes the server heavy even though the tri-game structure is logical. Many parallel families could be parameterized by game, and get_more_tools adds count without a clear domain purpose.

Completeness4/5

The read-only analytics surface is broadly complete: every game has tier lists, counters, matchups, synergies, momentum, draft prediction, and pick recommendations, plus Dota tournament coverage and a model track record. Gaps are minor—Dota lacks ladder ban rates, Deadlock and Marvel Rivals lack tournament stats and model evaluation ledgers, and their draft advice is only heuristic until six heroes are provided.

Resources