list_mlc_matches

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes return fields and optional filters but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, safe, or non-destructive. The listing nature implies safety, but without annotations, more explicit transparency would be beneficial.

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 concise sentences: first states functionality and optional filters, second states return fields and purpose. No redundant information; every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 optional params, no output schema) and context of sibling tools, the description is complete. It lists all key return fields, explains optional filters, and specifies the use case for discovering matchIds. No gaps identified.

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 67% (limit and season described; teamSlug missing). Description adds context that filters are optional and list the return fields, but does not elaborate on teamSlug format. It adds moderate value beyond the schema, compensating somewhat for the coverage gap.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'List', resource 'MLC matches', and optional filters (season, team slug). It also mentions return fields and a specific use case (discovering matchIds for get_mlc_match), distinguishing it from siblings like get_mlc_match.

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 states when to use: 'Use to discover matchIds for get_mlc_match.' Provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools; however, the purpose is sufficiently differentiated from siblings.

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