Cito API

by com.citoapi.api

upcoming_schedule

Read-only

Upcoming matches/events for one game, with game-specific filters.

When to use:

"What's on this week?"
Calendar UI; team next matches

Prefer over: live_matches for not-yet-started fixtures.

Do not use when: only in-progress matches needed → live_matches.

Filter support (unsupported params are ignored with meta.warnings — do not assume filtering worked):

lol: hours, team (slug), league (slug)
cs2: team, from, to (ISO); hours not applied upstream
cod: team, tournamentId
dota2: limit/cursor primarily; team may be client-filtered where data allows
ufc: hours / from / to applied client-side after bout expansion (API has no hours); event shells labeled by event name; bouts use fighters[] corners

Parallel-safe: yes. Upstream cost: 1–2. Example: { "game": "lol", "hours": 72, "team": "t1", "limit": 20 }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	ISO-8601 end bound.
`from`	No	ISO-8601 start bound.
`game`	Yes	Game title: lol \| cs2 \| dota2 \| cod \| ufc \| tennis. Example: "cs2".
`team`	No	Team id or slug filter.
`hours`	No	Horizon in hours when from/to not set (default 72). Example: 48.
`limit`	No	Max items to return (default 20, max 50). Example: 20.
`cursor`	No	Opaque cursor from pagination.nextCursor only.
`league`	No	League id or slug filter.
`tournamentId`	No	Tournament id filter.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	true if the tool succeeded
`data`	No	Result payload when ok is true; null on error
`meta`	Yes
`error`	No
`partial`	No
`pagination`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond that: unsupported params are silently ignored with meta.warnings, per-game filter application varies, 'hours not applied upstream' for cs2, client-side filtering for dota2/ufc, parallel safety, and upstream cost. These are critical operational details not derivable from the schema or annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than average but every section earns its place: purpose, usage context, exclusions, per-game filter caveats, parallel safety, cost, and an example. The bulleted structure keeps it scannable and the critical filter caveat is front-loaded before the per-game breakdown.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a multi-game tool with 9 parameters, varying filter support, and an output schema available, this description is complete. It covers what the tool returns conceptually, when to use it, when not to, per-game filter limitations, ignored-parameter behavior, and performance characteristics. Return-value details are appropriately left to the output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning the schema cannot convey: which parameters are actually honored per game, which are ignored, and which are applied client-side rather than upstream. The worked example '{"game": "lol", "hours": 72, "team": "t1", "limit": 20}' further clarifies intended usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Upcoming matches/events for one game, with game-specific filters.' It immediately differentiates from the sibling 'live_matches' by stating 'Prefer over: live_matches for not-yet-started fixtures,' so an agent can tell which tool matches the requested state.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage guidance is explicit: 'When to use' bullets cover calendar UI and team next-match queries, and 'Do not use when: only in-progress matches needed → live_matches' provides a direct exclusion and alternative. This is exactly the kind of when-versus-sibling guidance an agent needs.

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

All Cito API tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct job, and the descriptions explicitly separate temporal states (live vs upcoming vs preview vs recap vs deep-dive) and interaction modes (one-best resolve vs browse search, curated tool vs raw escape hatch). Even the match/event families are carefully tiered so an agent should rarely misselect.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are readable and grouped into recognizable families like list_*, match_*, and *_profile, but the overall convention is mixed: verb-prefixed names like resolve_entity and call_api sit alongside noun-phrase names like event_card, match_summary, and standings. Consistent snake_case prevents chaos, but there is no uniform verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is at the upper edge of the ideal range, but the server spans multiple games and several composite read workflows, so each tool has a distinct purpose. It feels slightly heavy but not bloated.

Completeness4/5

The set covers health, discovery, entity resolution, profiles, standings, schedules, live matches, previews, recaps, and deep-dive match data, with call_api as an escape hatch for long-tail routes. Notable omissions like a standalone historical results search and some per-game upstream gaps keep it from a perfect score.

Resources

Need Help?