faceit_getMatchmaking

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the endpoint and parameter but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, permissions needed, error behavior, or response structure. Adequate but not thorough.

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 concise, front-loading the primary purpose, then usage guidance, then endpoint and parameter. Each sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description only says 'Returns: Matchmaking', which is vague. It lacks details on response structure, error conditions, or any prerequisites. Given the simplicity, it is barely adequate but could do more.

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 description fully documents the sole parameter: name, location (path), type (str), requirement (required), and meaning (the id of the matchmaking). Since schema coverage is 0%, this adds essential meaning beyond the schema's title.

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 details of a matchmaking configuration by ID. It distinguishes from sibling getGameMatchmakings, which retrieves a list. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'matchmaking details' are specific.

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 fetch one matchmaking configuration by matchmaking_id' and provides an alternative: 'For the list of matchmakings belonging to a game use getGameMatchmakings.' This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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