faceit_getMatchStats

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

No annotations exist; the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns empty/404 for unfinished matches, which is a critical behavioral trait. It is read-only by nature, but the description does not explicitly state that.

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 clear verb, usage guidance, endpoint info, parameter list, and return note. Every sentence adds value and it is not verbose.

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?

The description is complete for a simple retrieval tool with one parameter. It explains what it does, when to use, and what it returns. However, it does not detail the return structure beyond listing data types.

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 0%, but the description explicitly explains the single parameter (match_id) as a required path string representing the match ID, adding full meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves statistics of a match, specifies the data included (rounds, K/D/A, map, score), and distinguishes from siblings like faceit_getMatch by focusing on stats for finished matches.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to use for finished matches only, and warns of empty/404 for unfinished matches. Does not explicitly name alternatives, but context implies differentiation from other match-related tools.

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