get_match_heroes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but fails to explain what 'detailed stats' include, how the 10 heroes are determined, or any other behavioral traits such as data source or limitations. The description is too minimal to be transparent.

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 a single concise sentence, which is well-structured and avoids unnecessary verbosity. However, it is so brief that it under-specifies key details, so it doesn't fully earn its place beyond basic identification.

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?

Although an output schema exists and the tool has a simple parameter set, the description leaves critical ambiguity: what exactly are 'the 10 heroes' (e.g., picked heroes, kills-related?) and what stats are included. It doesn't provide enough context for an agent to use it correctly without additional inference, making it incomplete.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the match_id parameter at all. It adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare integer field, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation. For a single-parameter tool, it could easily explain what match_id represents.

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 gets the 10 heroes from a Dota 2 match with detailed stats. The verb 'Get' and resource 'heroes in a Dota 2 match' are specific, and the mention of '10 heroes' provides a distinguishing detail compared to sibling tools like get_hero_performance or get_hero_deaths, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description omits any context about appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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