Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

opendota_hero_matchups

Fetch Dota 2 hero matchup data by hero ID, including games played, win rates, and localized opponent names, to compare recent public matchups.

Instructions

OpenDota Dota 2 hero matchup records. Returns how often a hero faced each other hero in recent public games and how often it won, sorted by games played, with localized hero names and win-rate percentages. An unknown hero id returns not found.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hero_idYesPositive hero ID from opendota-heroes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.18

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the sort order (games played), the enrichment of results (localized hero names, win-rate percentages), and the error behavior for an unknown hero id. It omits auth/rate-limit expectations and is vague about what 'recent public games' means as a time window, keeping it below 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource, then the return shape, then the error case. Every clause contributes information an agent needs, and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description is responsible for explaining returns, and it does: counts, win rates, localized names, sort order, and not-found handling. Only the recency definition of 'recent public games' and pagination/result-size limits are left unspecified.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single hero_id parameter is documented as 'Positive hero ID from opendota-heroes', so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only adds the not-found failure mode, not additional parameter meaning; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: returns hero-vs-hero matchup records including games played and win counts. That is clearly distinct from siblings like opendota_hero_stats or opendota_heroes, though the description never names a sibling to reinforce the boundary.

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?

Usage is only implied by what the tool returns ('how often a hero faced each other hero'); there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no pointer to opendota_heroes for ID lookup, even though the parameter itself is a hero id.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools