Retrieve game events for cs2 or deadlock, with optional substring filtering by event name or description to locate relevant entries.
List game events, optionally filtered by a substring of the name or description.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| game | Yes | Game id: one of cs2, deadlock | |
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | ||
| limit | Yes | ||
| total | Yes | ||
| offset | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the query filter is a substring match on name or description, which is real behavioral context, but says nothing about paging semantics (default 100, cap 200, offset ordering) that materially affect how results come back.
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 filler; the filtering behavior is stated up front. It is a touch thin for a 4-parameter list tool, but there is no verbosity to trim.
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?
An output schema exists, so return shape needn't be explained. Still, the description leaves paging (limit/offset interaction, max magnitude) and sibling disambiguation against get_game_event/list_games unaddressed, which an agent needs to call this correctly in a crowded tool namespace.
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 only 25% – solely 'game' is documented in the schema. The description supplies the missing meaning for 'query' (substring over name/description), which is valuable, but 'limit' and 'offset' remain completely undescribed in both schema and description, so it only partially compensates.
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 game events') plus the filter capability, so an agent knows what it returns. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_game_event' (single event) or 'list_games', leaving the selection boundary implicit.
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?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description does not point to 'get_game_event' for fetching one event by id, nor does it say the list is scoped to a game via the required 'game' param. Usage is only inferable from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.