Skip to main content
Glama

Vosters Rosters

Search football players

search_football_players
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search verified football players by program and physical profile.

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": "search_football_players"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
unitNo
limitNo
positionNo
team_nameNo
class_yearNo
conferenceNo
subdivisionNo
max_height_cmNo
max_weight_kgNo
min_height_cmNo
min_weight_kgNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that results are 'verified' players, but it does not disclose matching behavior, empty-filter behavior, pagination, or result limits beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized as a sentence, even if the content is insufficient for the parameter set.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 12 optional filters and no schema descriptions, the description is far too thin to help an agent call this correctly. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the input filtering behavior and default limit are not addressed.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across 12 parameters, so the description must carry the burden. It only broadly gestures at 'program' and 'physical profile', leaving name, position, class_year, unit, limit, conference, subdivision, and min/max height and weight semantics unexplained.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search football players') and adds scope ('verified', 'by program and physical profile'). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from similarly named siblings such as search_players, filter_players, or get_football_player.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions. The phrase 'by program and physical profile' hints at search use but does not explain how it relates to sibling search or lookup tools.

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