List LiveScore's five fixture sports and return their IDs, such as soccer and hockey, for use as the sport input in scores queries.
LiveScore supported sports. Lists the five sports in LiveScore's fixture navigation, with no inputs. The ids are soccer (shown as Football on the site), hockey, basketball, tennis and cricket. Use an id as the sport input of the LiveScore scores endpoint.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the key behavioral facts: it is a fixed enumeration, takes no inputs, and always returns the same five ids. It also notes the display-name mismatch ('soccer' shown as Football), which is a real gotcha. It stops short of saying the list is static/cacheable or how the values are ordered.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool is, followed by the return values, followed by how to use them. No filler or redundancy.
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?
No output schema or annotations exist, yet the description fully specifies the payload (five named ids) and the intended follow-up call, so nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
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?
Zero parameters, so baseline is 4, but the description goes further by enumerating the five literal id values and clarifying the soccer/Football naming discrepancy — the exact semantics an agent needs when passing these ids into sibling endpoints.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the five sports in LiveScore's fixture navigation') and enumerates the exact ids returned. An agent can distinguish this enumeration endpoint from siblings like livescore_competitions or livescore_scores without opening a schema.
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?
Explicitly says to 'Use an id as the sport input of the LiveScore scores endpoint,' which gives a concrete downstream use. It does not, however, state when this tool should be skipped or name any alternative sibling for discovering sports.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.