List Dota 2 matches

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context by labeling the tool as 'expensive', which guides the agent on cost implications beyond what annotations capture.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose and scope, the second adds usage guidance and cost context. Every word earns its place.

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?

While an output schema exists (reducing need to describe return values), the description still lacks coverage of the optional filtering parameters (to, from, limit, status). For a tool with 6 parameters and 2 required, the minimal description leaves gaps in how to construct correct invocations, especially for date ranges and result limits.

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?

With only 17% schema description coverage (only canonical_title has a description), the description should compensate but does not. It mentions 'for one exact tournament or team page' which hints at scope_type and canonical_title, but completely omits explanations for the other four parameters (to, from, limit, status). The agent must infer their meaning from names alone, which is insufficient.

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 lists schedule or result rows for one exact tournament or team page. This is a specific verb-resource combo that distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_dota2_entities (which searches broadly) or get_dota2_tournament (which fetches tournament details).

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 explicitly says 'use only when the user asks about matches, schedules, scores, or results' and notes it's an 'expensive match-specific lookup'. This provides clear context for when to invoke, though it does not explicitly list exclusions or name alternatives beyond the implied contrast with siblings.

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