get_f1_standingsGet the public Formula 1 driver and constructor standings for a season with canonical source links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | Formula 1 season year. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | ||
| drivers | Yes | ||
| sourceUrl | Yes | ||
| sessionKey | Yes | ||
| canonicalUrl | Yes | ||
| constructors | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaAdded value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / descriptionAdded value: +"Select one Formula 1 season."Output schema / $schemaAdded value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / descriptionAdded value: +"Formula 1 driver and constructor standings with the source session and canonical links."Input schema / properties / year / descriptionAdded value: +"Formula 1 season year."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "canonicalUrl": {
+ "format": "uri",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "constructors": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "colour": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "constructorName": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "logoUrl": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "points": {
+ "minimum": 0,
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "position": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "position",
+ "points",
+ "constructorName",
+ "colour",
+ "logoUrl"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "drivers": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "driverName": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "driverNumber": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "headshotUrl": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "points": {
+ "minimum": 0,
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "position": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "position",
+ "points",
+ "driverNumber",
+ "driverName",
+ "headshotUrl"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "sessionKey": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "sourceUrl": {
+ "format": "uri",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "year": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "year",
+ "sessionKey",
+ "canonicalUrl",
+ "sourceUrl",
+ "drivers",
+ "constructors"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, fully covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minor behavioral context (canonical source links) but does not significantly expand beyond annotations. No contradiction present.
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 a single sentence of 14 words, conveying all essential information with zero redundancy. Every word earns its place—no wasted text.
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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema (exists but not shown), the description covers the main goal. However, it could explicitly state that both driver and constructor standings are returned in a single call to avoid ambiguity. Still, it is largely complete.
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 100% with the 'year' parameter already described in the input schema. The description does not add new meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides, such as valid season ranges or date formats, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 both driver and constructor standings for a season, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('public Formula 1 driver and constructor standings'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_f1_session_results or get_f1_driver_session_summary, which have different scopes.
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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the large set of sibling tools (e.g., get_f1_historical_race_result, get_f1_season_schedule), some contextual advice on when standings are appropriate would help agents, though the purpose is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.