List matches for a date

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description adds real value by explaining the volatility of the data — 'upcoming' reads are locked, 'pending' may still change before kick-off, 'finished' is settled. It is silent on pagination/limits, but a single-day list makes that minor.

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?

Three dense sentences with the resource and scope front-loaded, then the returned fields, then the status vocabulary, then the sibling handoff. No filler.

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 compensates by enumerating return fields and defining every status value an agent will encounter. Combined with the sibling routing and timezone scoping, nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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% (tz, date, lang, league all documented), so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the one-day scoping and UTC framing of kick-off times but adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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+resource ('Matches for one calendar day') and enumerates the returned fields (match_id, kick-off UTC, league, teams, status). It also names the sibling to use for a single match, so an agent can tell it apart from get_match_analysis without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative path clearly: 'Pass a match_id to get_match_analysis for the outcome probabilities'. It conveys the current-context usage of the listing itself, but gives no guidance on the league filter or when-not to call it, and says nothing about get_open_record.

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