Retrieve a team's next match in a given league using the team ID and league ID to check upcoming fixtures.
Get a team's next match in a league. Returns the next match for one team id in one league id. Discover the league id with openligadb_leagues and the team id with openligadb_teams.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| team_id | Yes | OpenLigaDB team id from openligadb_teams | |
| league_id | Yes | OpenLigaDB league id from openligadb_leagues |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.18Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It implies a read-only lookup but says nothing about what happens when the team has no scheduled upcoming fixture, or whether only the first of several future matches is returned.
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 the core purpose. The second sentence mostly restates the first in different words, which is the only real waste.
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 simple two-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description plus schema covers the essentials. The missing piece is the empty/no-upcoming-match case, which matters for a 'next match' tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters are already documented with their source tools in the schema itself. The description's mention of the discovery tools largely restates what the schema says, adding little new semantics.
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: fetch a single team's next match, scoped by one team id and one league id. This separates it from the league-wide variant and from last-match tools, though it never names those siblings explicitly.
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?
Gives actionable setup guidance: retrieve league_id via `openligadb_leagues` and team_id via `openligadb_teams`. It does not state when to prefer this over `openligadb_next_match` or `openligadb_last_team_match`, so the routing is helpful but incomplete.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.