faceit_getPlayerHistory

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

Discloses that returns match metadata (not stats) and mentions endpoint, but no annotations exist. Lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond parameter descriptions, though it adds value by describing output type.

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?

Description is well-structured: a one-line purpose, usage context, endpoint, clear parameter list with descriptions, and return type. Front-loaded and efficient with no wasted words.

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?

Covers the main purpose, parameters, and output type ('Player matches list'). Without an output schema, it does not detail the structure of a match object, but the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's basic function.

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 0%, so description fully compensates by explaining each parameter, including defaults (from_ defaults to 1 month ago, to defaults to current timestamp). However, the 'game' parameter is only vaguely described as 'A game on FACEIT'.

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 'Retrieve all matches of a player' and specifies the verb 'list' with resource 'matches'. It distinguishes from sibling getMatchStats, providing clarity on what this tool returns (match metadata vs. stats).

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 'Use to list matches a player has played across a time window' and advises pairing with getMatchStats for per-match detail, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives beyond that.

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