openligadb_matchday_matches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds useful context beyond these: auth is not needed, the return shape matches openligadb_season_matches, and typical size (~9 matches). This gives the agent a clear behavioral model without contradicting the annotations.

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 tight and front-loaded with the core purpose, then follows with return shape, an example, and auth note. No redundancy or filler—every sentence contributes to understanding.

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?

Even though there's no output schema, the description adequately explains the return shape by referencing openligadb_season_matches, and the example provides an input pattern. Combined with the annotations covering safety and idempotency, this is complete for a simple, read-only, single-matchday lookup.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete, complete example that clarifies the season format as a string ('2024') and shows the league default in action, which goes slightly beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 the tool returns 'One matchday's fixtures and results' and immediately differentiates it from the sibling openligadb_season_matches by noting 'restricted to one matchday'. The verb 'Returns' and resource are specific, and the example further confirms the exact purpose.

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?

It provides clear context by calling this 'the everyday call' and specifying it handles one matchday, indirectly distinguishing it from season-wide tools. However, it stops short of explicitly saying 'use openligadb_season_matches for multiple matchdays', so there's no formal exclusion but the intended use case is evident.

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