Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Morris Golf

by golf.morris
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get strokes gained by area

get_strokes_gained_by_area
Read-onlyIdempotent

Golpes ganados del jugador por área: salida, approach, alrededor del green y putt, por cada 18 hoyos, con el área donde más pierde y la comparación con golfistas de su nivel (o del nivel que pida: Tour, scratch o aficionados por resultado). Sale de los golpes de su reloj (Garmin, o marcados a mano en la app o el Apple Watch), con la bandera del día y los putts de la tarjeta, y descarta los hoyos que no cuadran con la tarjeta. Úsala cuando pregunte qué parte del juego le cuesta más golpes, qué priorizar o cómo está frente a otros de su nivel. Sin golpes no hay datos: entonces get_my_strokes_gained parte juego largo y putt desde la tarjeta.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_strokes_gained_by_area"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceNoNivel con el que comparar: tour (PGA Tour, 64-71), scratch, am1 (hace 70-83), am2 (84-97) o am3 (98-120). Si no se indica, el suyo por su resultado medio, o por su hándicap.
last_roundsNoCuántas vueltas recientes contar. 20 si no se indica.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: data provenance (Garmin watch, manual app entry, Apple Watch), dependency on the day's pin location and scorecard putts, and a data-quality rule that holes inconsistent with the scorecard are discarded. It does not cover latency or partial-data behavior when only some rounds have shots, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and its output areas, then source/quality caveats, then the usage trigger and the alternative. It is dense and long for a single sentence-plus block, but nearly every clause carries information; a slightly tighter split into distinct sentences would read better.

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 read-only, two-optional-parameter analytics tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (per-area strokes gained per 18 holes, worst area, peer comparison), where the data comes from, what gets excluded, and what to do when data is missing. An agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly.

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% and the enum values with their score ranges plus the last_rounds default are fully documented in the schema. The description restates the reference concept (Tour/scratch/amateurs) and the default-by-result-or-handicap behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (strokes gained broken down by area: off the tee, approach, around the green, putting) and names the exact outputs (worst-performing area, comparison against a reference level). It also explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling get_my_strokes_gained by noting that tool's coarse long-game/putt split.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger condition (user asks which part of the game costs most strokes, what to prioritize, or how they compare to peers) and an explicit fallback rule: with no shot data, use get_my_strokes_gained instead. Both when-to-use and when-to-use-the-alternative are covered.

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

All Morris Golf toolsInspect
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.

Resources