Skip to main content
Glama

Batru — Dota 2, Deadlock & Marvel Rivals win predictor

by gg.batru

get_dota_hero_momentum

Read-only

Which Dota 2 heroes got better or worse after the patch — winners/losers by win-rate shift.

Compares each hero's win rate over the last 14 days vs the prior 14 days
WITHIN the current patch — real trend data from batru.gg's match
aggregation, not a guess. Useful for "what's getting stronger lately?"
questions between patches.

Args:
    hero: Optional — a specific hero to look up. Empty returns the top
        risers and fallers overview.
    limit: Max risers/fallers to return in overview mode (default 10).

Returns {patch, window_days, data_through, ...} plus either one hero's
{hero, wr_recent_pct, wr_prev_pct, delta_pp, n_recent, n_prev} or
{risers:[...], fallers:[...]}. delta_pp is percentage-point change; small
deltas (<1pp) are noise — say so rather than over-reading them.

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

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
heroNo
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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/destructive annotations, the description discloses the 14-day vs prior-14-day window, the batru.gg data source, the noise caveat for small deltas, and the citation/source_url presentation requirement. This is substantial behavioral 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is organized into purpose, method, usage, Args, Returns, and presentation instructions, with the key question front-loaded. Despite covering many details, every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Because there is no output schema, the description supplies the return shape for both single-hero and overview modes, explains delta_pp, flags noise, and even handles source attribution. For a read-only query tool of this complexity, nothing essential is missing.

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?

With only 33% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining hero (optional, empty returns overview) and limit (max risers/fallers, default 10). The required context parameter is left to the schema's own detailed description, and hero name formatting is not specified, so it is helpful but not exhaustive.

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 specific question—'Which Dota 2 heroes got better or worse after the patch'—and identifies the exact resource (heroes by win-rate shift). It clearly differentiates from siblings like get_dota_tier_list or predict_dota_winrate by emphasizing 14-day momentum and 'winners/losers by win-rate shift.' The unique comparison window makes the tool's role unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly frames the right use case: 'what's getting stronger lately?' questions between patches. It does not mention when to prefer sibling tools such as get_dota_tier_list or predict_dota_winrate, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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