fotmob_player_match_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the data is 'public' and describes the returned row contents (stat key, value, translated label), which is meaningful. It does not, however, mention auth needs, rate limits, volume expectations, or the exact response container, leaving some gaps.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: purpose, return contents, and ID discovery are each stated once. The most important scoping information is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description adequately covers return semantics and how to obtain valid inputs. It does not explain possible edge cases or response shape nuances, but the low complexity and full schema coverage make the missing details minor.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters fully (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine value by explaining how to discover the required player_id and match_id through fotmob/search, fotmob/match, or fotmob/player-matches, going beyond the schema's simple 'Numeric FotMob id' labels.

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?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: it 'Returns the public per-match stat rows for one player', including stat key, value, and translated label. This differentiates it from nearby siblings like fotmob_player_stats and fotmob_player_matches through the 'per-match' scope, though it does not explicitly name any alternative it is not.

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?

The description gives useful context on how to obtain prerequisite identifiers ('Discover player ids through fotmob/search and match ids through fotmob/match or fotmob/player-matches'), which implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over the closely related fotmob_player_stats or fotmob_player_matches, nor does it provide exclusions.

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