Skip to main content
Glama

turnale

by app.turnale

Promote from waitlist

promote_player

Move a waitlisted player onto the active roster when a spot opens (signed-in players are notified by email). The cap can be raised with update_settings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
request_idNoOptional idempotency id — retrying a call with the same id never applies it twice
tournament_keyYesThe tournament's organiser key (starts with tk_)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
statusYes
previewNoTrue when this is a preview — nothing was changed
summaryYesWhat happened, in one line

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description discloses that signed-in players are notified by email, which is a meaningful side effect. It also notes the cap-related behavior, adding context not available in the structured data. No contradiction with 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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every word contributes value. It avoids repetition of schema details and stays focused on the tool's purpose and key context.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool is relatively simple, and an output schema is provided, so return values are covered elsewhere. The description addresses the core scenario, the email notification, and the cap alternative. It doesn't discuss edge cases like failure modes, but those are not essential given the tool's simplicity and the presence of other structured context.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 67% (tournament_key and request_id have descriptions). The description doesn't explicitly explain the `name` parameter, which lacks a schema description, but the tool's purpose implies it identifies the waitlisted player. Overall, the description adds minimal parameter-level semantic value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Move a waitlisted player onto the active roster') and the specific condition ('when a spot opens'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_players, remove_player, and replace_player by focusing on the waitlist-to-active roster transition.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides a clear trigger ('when a spot opens') and suggests an alternative for a related scenario ('The cap can be raised with update_settings'). It doesn't explicitly exclude other player-management tools, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when to choose this tool.

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

All turnale toolsInspect
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools serve overlapping purposes: get_pdf and get_pdf_link both return PDF artifacts, get_schedule and list_matches both provide match scheduling info, and get_results vs. get_standings can be confused for finished tournaments. However, the descriptions clarify the distinctions (embedded vs. link, upcoming vs. all matches, final vs. current standings), and roster-management tools are clearly separated by action.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 30 tools consistently use lowercase snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_tournament, record_results, withdraw_player). The only slight variation is the mix of get_* and list_* for read operations, but that's a common and predictable convention. There are no camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count2/5

With 30 tools, the server exceeds the 'too many' threshold of 25. While the domain is complex, this count is heavy and may overwhelm agents, especially since several tools could be consolidated (e.g., get_pdf/get_pdf_link, get_schedule/list_matches). A more streamlined set around 20 tools would be more appropriate.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive lifecycle coverage for tournament management: create/delete/end tournaments, manage players (add, remove, replace, withdraw, promote, update), generate draws, record results, handle doubles pairs, reschedule, retrieve standings/schedule/results, export/PDF, audit log, undo changes, and feedback. No major gaps are apparent for the stated purpose.

Resources