WCS Points

Get the history of a WSDC event

get_event_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every edition of a WSDC event series in the registry (for example each year's US Open), most recent first, with the winners (or the top placements) of each division or of one division. Also lists other event series that matched the query.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "get_event_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum number of editions (years) to return
`query`	Yes	Words from the event's name, e.g. 'US Open'
`places`	No	Placements to show per division: 1 = winners only
`division`	No	Only this division, e.g. 'Champions' (default: every division)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`series`	Yes	Name of the event series (the most recent edition's name)
`editions`	Yes	Most recent first
`other_series`	Yes	Other event series that also matched the query
`wsdc_event_id`	No	WSDC's own ID of the event series
`editions_total`	Yes	Editions with results in the registry (before limit)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description's job is to add context — and it does, disclosing result ordering (most recent first) and the default coverage of all divisions unless one is named. It also reveals a non-obvious side effect: the response includes other event series that matched the query, which an agent would not guess from the schema.

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 dense sentences with no filler; the core scope (every edition, most recent first, with placements) is front-loaded. The trailing note about other matched series is slightly tacked on, and the odd line breaks add no structural value.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers scope, ordering, and the division/places defaults. It leaves open edge behavior such as what happens when the query matches nothing or how it relates to the results-oriented siblings.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns a bit more by framing how 'places' and 'division' interact — winners vs. top placements, one division vs. every division. It does not add format or syntax detail for 'query' or 'limit' beyond the schema, so it stays short of full marks.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it returns every edition of a WSDC event series, most recent first, with winners or top placements per division. That is concrete enough to distinguish it from search_events or get_event_results in spirit, though it never names a sibling explicitly to draw 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 only implied: the query is 'words from the event's name' and the tool covers a series across years. There is no explicit when-to-use versus when-to-use-something-else, nor any statement of when this is the wrong choice (e.g. a single event's results vs. a series history).

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

All WCS Points tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.