Skip to main content
Glama

Batru — Dota 2, Deadlock & Marvel Rivals win predictor

by gg.batru

get_marvel_rivals_counters

Read-only

Who counters a Marvel Rivals 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). 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 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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnly and destructive annotations by disclosing data provenance (batru.gg match aggregation), internal hero-name normalization, return structure, the meaning of winrate_pct, and the instruction to report numbers verbatin and show the citation/source_url. This gives an agent critical behavioral and presentational context.

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 concisely organized with a short summary, an Args section, a clear return contract, and a presentation note. Each sentence adds useful information without padding or unnecessary repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides a complete return contract: the top-level keys, the row fields, the interpretation of winrate_pct, and the source attribution requirement. This is more than sufficient for an agent to invoke and present the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 33%, but the description directly explains both hero (name/lias, normalized internally) and limit (max number of matchups, default 12) in its Args section. The context parameter is fully described in the schema, so all parameters are effectively covered.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: it returns which heroes counter a given Marvel Rivals hero and which heroes it beats, based on measured win rates. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_marvel_rivals_matchup by focusing on an aggregate best/worst matchup list rather than a single matchup lookup.

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 conveys a clear use case: look up a hero's strongest and weakest matchups from real observed data, with sample sizes. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the return shape and 'empirical meta data' framing make the intended scenario unambiguous.

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