list_live_matches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are grouped by tournament and that ids feed get_match with line_type 'live', but says nothing about result size, pagination, or freshness/latency of live data.

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, front-loaded with the resource and its payload, followed by the precise next-step tool. No filler and nothing redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly names what is returned (score, period, minute, main odds, tournament grouping), which is exactly what an agent needs to decide to call it. It leaves minor gaps around response size and the overview-vs-filtered mode that the schema covers, so not quite complete.

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 100% and every parameter (limit, esports, markets, sport_id, include_odds, tournament_id, max_markets_per_match) is documented in the schema itself. The description only alludes to default markets and does not add syntax or interaction details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('list_live_matches' → live in-play matches) and enumerates the returned fields (score, period, minute, main odds) plus grouping by tournament. The 'Live (in-play)' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling list_prematch_matches, though no sibling is named.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent onward: use get_match with a game_id from here (line_type 'live') for all markets and live stats. This gives clear context for the tool's role as an overview entry point. It does not state when not to use it versus list_prematch_matches or top_matches, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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