openliga: Get matches by matchday

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint as true. The description adds no additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, pagination handling, or required authentication. It simply restates the action without offering new insights beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is precise and free of unnecessary words. It communicates the core function effectively. However, it could be slightly expanded (e.g., by noting the output type) without becoming verbose, so it is not a perfect score.

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 no output schema, the description does not indicate what data is returned (e.g., match scores, teams). The sibling tools list is extensive, but the description does not help the agent differentiate. For a simple query tool, it is minimally complete, but lacks depth.

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% with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., 'Season year, e.g. 2023'). The description does not add extra meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states 'Get matches for a specific matchday in a league and season', which specifies the verb 'get', the resource 'matches', and the scope 'specific matchday'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'openliga_get_matches_by_league_season' which retrieves matches for an entire season without filtering by matchday.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., openliga_get_matches_by_league_season or openliga_get_match_data). It does not mention prerequisites, context, or any disclaimers. An agent using this tool would need to infer usage from the name alone.

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