Skip to main content
Glama

vs_get

El registro completo de una partida del MODO VS: problema, contexto, jugadores, resultado y todas las jugadas (argumentos y solución de cada una) en orden. Con tu seatToken te dice además qué puesto eres.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "matchId": "<matchId>"
    },
    "name": "vs_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
matchIdYesID de la partida
seatTokenNoTu seatToken (te lo dio vs_open o vs_join): identifica tu puesto en la partida

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'registro... get' implies a read, and it discloses the richness and ordering of the return payload, but it says nothing about permissions, behavior when the matchId is invalid, pagination of plays, or side effects.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two compact sentences that front-load the core purpose and then the enumerated payload. No filler, though the parenthetical about arguments/solution of each play is slightly dense.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the necessary work of enumerating the returned fields (problem, context, players, result, ordered plays), which is what an agent needs to decide relevance. It stops short of covering error cases or volume/pagination expectations for a full play history.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including that seatToken identifies your position. The description only marginally extends this by stating the seatToken additionally reveals your rank in the returned record, which is a modest value-add over the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ('El registro completo de una partida del MODO VS') and enumerates exactly what the record contains: problem, context, players, result, and all plays in order. It is far more specific than a tautology, though it never names a sibling (vs_list, vs_open) to sharpen the boundary.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the content it returns (fetch one match's full detail), and the seatToken sentence signals an optional use case. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no reference to alternatives like vs_list for browsing matches.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources