faceit_getGameMatchmakings

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies read-only behavior via the GET endpoint and retrieval language, but does not explicitly state nondestructive nature, authentication requirements, or potential error conditions. It provides basic behavioral context but could be more transparent.

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 well-structured with a brief overview, usage recommendation, endpoint specification, parameter list, and return type. While the first sentence somewhat repeats the tool name, the overall structure is clear and efficient.

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 only states 'Returns: Matchmakings list', which lacks detail on the structure of list items or pagination metadata. For a list endpoint, more completeness on return format would improve agent understanding.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaningful explanations for all four parameters: game_id as required path param, region as optional query, offset with min 0, limit with min 1 and max 100. It provides constraints and purpose beyond the schema definitions.

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 the tool retrieves all matchmakings for a game and lists matchmaking queues. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'faceit_getMatchmaking' by specifying that tool is for details of a single matchmaking.

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 explicitly says 'Use to list the matchmaking queues a game exposes' and suggests drilling down with getMatchmaking for single matchmaking details. It provides good guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternative.

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