Skip to main content
Glama

livetennisapi-mcp

by io.github.livetennisapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Fixture schedule

get_fixtures
Read-onlyIdempotent

Upcoming scheduled tennis fixtures, earliest first — the forward schedule, filterable by tour, player and date. Use this for "what is on this week". Works on the FREE plan (no card needed).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tourNoTour filter; each name covers its doubles variants. Exhibition/team events carry no tour and are excluded whenever the filter is used.
limitNoMaximum fixtures to return (1-200).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the call returned data. False for a tier wall, a missing or rejected key, or an empty result — all of which are normal states with a clear remedy, not failures.
messageYesHuman-readable summary. Identical to the text content, so either half can be used alone.
fixturesNoScheduled fixtures, earliest first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / tour
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Tour filter; each name covers its doubles variants. Exhibition/team events carry no tour and are excluded whenever the filter is used.",
+  "enum": [
+    "atp",
+    "wta",
+    "challenger",
+    "itf",
+    "juniors"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by stating the ordering (earliest first), the forward-looking scope, and the free-plan availability, complementing the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive hints. However, it falsely claims filterability by player and date when the schema only accepts tour and limit, which undermines accurate behavior disclosure.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, with the use case and access note following efficiently. Minor redundancy ('the forward schedule' restates 'upcoming') and the inaccurate filter phrase prevent a perfect score.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The input schema fully documents the two parameters and an output schema exists, so parameter semantics and return format are covered. The description supplies ordering and access context but lacks differentiation from the overlapping sibling get_upcoming_matches and includes an unsupported filter claim, leaving an agent with a notable gap.

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 100%, so the baseline would be 3 even without additional parameter info in the description. But the description actively misrepresents the parameter surface by claiming player and date filters that do not exist in the schema; only tour and limit are supported. This misleading information makes the description counterproductive for parameter understanding.

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 the tool returns upcoming scheduled tennis fixtures in chronological order ('earliest first'), clearly identifying a forward-looking read operation. However, it claims filtering by player and date, which the schema does not support, and it does not differentiate from the similarly named sibling get_upcoming_matches.

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 gives an explicit use case ('what is on this week') and notes that it works on the free plan with no card needed, which is useful access guidance. It does not mention alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All livetennisapi-mcp 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