get_course
Retrieve detailed information for a specific disc golf course by its unique ID or alias.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Stable canonical course identifier or alias (1-256 characters). |
DiscGolfAPI MCP
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieve' explicitly signals a read-only operation, and 'detailed information' hints at the richness of the response. It does not mention permissions or error behavior, but for a simple retrieval these are not critical gaps.
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, well-structured sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and resource, then specifies the input scope.
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?
For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient: an agent knows what to pass and that the result will be detailed. It doesn't describe error cases or edge conditions, but these are not essential for a straightforward get-by-ID operation.
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?
The schema already documents the 'id' parameter as a canonical identifier or alias, and the description merely echoes this ('by its unique ID or alias') without adding new meaning. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 uses the specific verb 'retrieve' and names the resource 'disc golf course', making the action and target unambiguous. It also clarifies the selection method (by unique ID or alias), which distinguishes it from the sibling tools like search_courses and find_courses_near.
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 clearly implies that this tool is used when you have a specific course ID or alias, providing the necessary context for selection. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the top tier of explicit routing.
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.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: location-based search, attribute-based search, detailed retrieval by ID, and tracking recent updates. There is minimal overlap, and the descriptions clearly differentiate the search methods.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools follow a verb_noun pattern, but the verb choice is inconsistent: 'find' for location search, 'search' for attribute search, and 'get' for two other operations. The pattern is readable and predictable, with only minor stylistic variation.
Tool Count5/5
With only 4 tools, the server is tightly scoped to disc golf course discovery and updates. Each tool addresses a distinct need without redundancy, making the count ideal for its purpose.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers primary workflows: finding courses by location or attributes, retrieving full details, and checking recent changes. Missing are write operations, but for a read-only API the coverage is solid; a minor gap is lack of a direct 'list all courses' endpoint, though search can handle it.