Skip to main content
Glama

Batru — Dota 2, Deadlock & Marvel Rivals win predictor

by gg.batru

get_dota_counters

Read-only

Who counters a Dota 2 hero (and who it beats) — measured win rates from real games.

Returns opponents this hero performs BEST and WORST against, by real observed
matchup win rate (with sample sizes). This is 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/shortName).
    limit: Max number of matchups to return (default 12).

Returns {hero, best_against:[...], worst_against:[...]} where each row has
{opponent, winrate_pct, matches}. winrate_pct > 50 means `hero` beats that
opponent. 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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already signal read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior, and the description adds meaningful context: data source from batru.gg match aggregation, internal hero-name normalization, sample sizes, the winrate_pct > 50 interpretation, and instructions to report numbers verbatim and cite source_url. No contradiction with annotations.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose and uses clear sections for args and returns. Each sentence adds useful information, though the Args section omits the required context parameter and the early sentences slightly restate the best/worst concept.

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 no output schema, the description does a good job of documenting the return shape, the meaning of winrate_pct, and the expected reporting behavior. Minor gaps are that citation/source_url is referenced but not included in the return structure, and the required context parameter is absent from the Args section, but both are recoverable from schema or context.

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 coverage is only 33%, but the description compensates by defining hero as name/alias/shortName and limit with its default and meaning. The context parameter is not covered in the description, but the schema provides a thorough instruction block for it, so the agent has enough to invoke correctly.

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 verb-object statement: 'Who counters a Dota 2 hero (and who it beats)' and then specifies it returns best/worst opponents by observed matchup win rate. This clearly defines the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from related matchup/synergy tools, even without naming them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the use case: when the agent needs best/worst matchup data for a single hero, as opposed to comparing two heroes or drafting. However, it never explicitly names alternatives such as get_dota_matchup or states when not to use this tool, so the guidance remains implicit rather than explicit.

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