MCP Dota 2 Match Analysis Server

get_rune_pickups

Retrieve power rune pickup events in a Dota 2 match, including game time, hero, and rune type. Use it to analyze which heroes secured runes and when.

Instructions

Get power rune pickups in a Dota 2 match.

Returns a list of power rune pickup events with:

game_time: Seconds since game start
game_time_str: Formatted as M:SS
hero: Hero that picked up the rune
rune_type: Type of rune (haste, double_damage, arcane, invisibility, regeneration, shield)

Note: Only power runes are trackable. Bounty, wisdom, and water runes don't leave detectable events in the replay data.

Use this to answer questions like:

"Who got the most power runes?"
"What runes did the mid player secure?"
"When did they get a DD rune before fighting?"

Args: match_id: The Dota 2 match ID

Returns: RunePickupsResponse with list of power rune pickup events

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "match_id": "<match_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_rune_pickups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`match_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`pickups`	No
`success`	Yes
`match_id`	Yes
`total_pickups`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It details what the tool returns (a list of events with specific fields), and clearly notes a critical limitation (only power runes are detectable). It does not discuss potential errors or side effects, but for a read-only retrieval tool this is adequate.

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?

The description is well-structured and appropriately sized: a one-line summary, then a bulleted list of return fields, a limitation note, example questions, and an args/returns section. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the most important information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is highly complete. It explains the return fields, notes the limitation, and gives example use cases. The presence of an output schema means the description need not detail the response structure, but it does anyway, making the tool self-contained.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage for its single parameter (match_id), but the description compensates by stating 'match_id: The Dota 2 match ID.' This provides clear meaning beyond the bare integer type in the schema, fully covering the parameter's purpose.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description starts with 'Get power rune pickups in a Dota 2 match' — a specific verb ('Get') plus a clear resource ('power rune pickups') and context ('in a Dota 2 match'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on rune pickups, which is unique among the listed tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context through example questions and explicitly states that only power runes are trackable, which serves as a when-not to use this tool for other rune types. However, it does not name an alternative tool (e.g., 'use get_item_purchases for items'), so it lacks explicit alternative guidance.

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