cricketdata_matches

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by disclosing pagination behavior, the exact return shape, and a critical caveat that the shape is unverified from vendor docs. It also explains the authentication requirement (CRICKETDATA_API_KEY). This is exceptionally transparent for an unverified vendor integration.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides return shape, caveat, example, and auth info. While the caveat adds length, it is essential for transparency. The 'Example: Recent matches' section is more of a heading than a real example, slightly reducing structure clarity.

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 list endpoint with one optional parameter, the description covers the key aspects: scope, pagination, return shape, auth, and reliability caveat. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though it lacks explicit field descriptions (mitigated by the output shape being listed).

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 only parameter, offset, is fully described in the input schema as 'Page offset (25 per page)'. The description adds no further detail about the parameter, so it relies on the schema which already covers it. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'All matches, paginated — recent and upcoming across every series', specifying a concrete verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cricketdata_current_matches, which presumably returns only current matches.

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 implies usage for retrieving all matches and mentions pagination, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as cricketdata_current_matches or state when not to use this tool. Usage is inferred rather than explicitly guided.

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