sportmicro_get_matches

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or what 'documented' means for coverage. Essentially only the read-like verb 'Get' hints at behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of specificity rather than being over-long.

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 annotations, no output schema, no defined parameters, and siblings covering adjacent domains, the description leaves substantial gaps. An agent cannot tell what filters are accepted or what a match record contains.

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?

Parameter count is 0, so the baseline is 4. The mention of 'optional filters' is consistent with an open schema (additionalProperties: true), though the description does not name any filter, which is a minor gap rather than a schema-level deficiency.

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 ('Get ... football matches'), which is distinguishable from the sibling tools that cover players, teams, and statistics. The qualifier 'documented' is vague and adds no actionable meaning, but the core purpose is clear.

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 mentions 'optional filters' but never says when to use this tool over the sibling match/player/team endpoints, nor what context or prerequisites apply. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is present.

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