livetennisapi-mcp

Player rankings as of a date

get_player_rankings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Point-in-time ranking records for SPECIFIC players. Per system, the newest record in force ON OR BEFORE as_of, never one dated after it. Every other ranking field in this API is the CURRENT value joined at read time. This one is the historical answer. Systems are never collapsed: ATP/WTA and the ITF circuits carry rank+points, UTR a rating. ITF and UTR history begins 2026-07-29. Requires the ULTRA plan.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`as_of`	No	YYYY-MM-DD. The record in force on this date. Omit for the latest known.
`system`	No	Restrict to one system. Omit for every system held for the player.
`player_ids`	Yes	Roster player ids, as returned by search_players. Max 50.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	True when the request succeeded, including when the answer is an empty list. False for a missing or rejected key, a plan that does not include this data, an unknown id, a rate limit or a network error. The message then says what to do. check_api_status is the exception: it is true whenever the API answered, and reports API key problems in the message.
`message`	Yes	Human-readable summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.
`coverage`	No	What resolved against what was asked (players_resolved, systems_resolved, oldest_available per system). Read before trusting an empty result.
`rankings`	No	One record per player × system held.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / as_of / description

Previous value: -"YYYY-MM-DD — the record in force on this date. Omit for the latest known."New value: +"YYYY-MM-DD. The record in force on this date. Omit for the latest known."

changedOutput schema / properties / message / description

Previous value: -"Human-readable summary. Identical to the text content, so either half can be used alone."New value: +"Human-readable summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim."

changedOutput schema / properties / ok / description

Previous value: -"True 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."New value: +"True when the request succeeded, including when the answer is an empty list. False for a missing or rejected key, a plan that does not include this data, an unknown id, a rate limit or a network error. The message then says what to do. check_api_status is the exception: it is true whenever the API answered, and reports API key problems in the message."

changedOutput schema / properties / rankings / items / properties / player_id / description

Previous value: -"Roster player id — null on listing rows for players outside our roster."New value: +"Roster player id. Null on listing rows for players outside our roster."

changedOutput schema / properties / rankings / items / properties / player_name / description

Previous value: -"Name as the ranking publisher printed it (listing rows)."New value: +"Player name as it appears in the ranking (listing rows)."

changedOutput schema / properties / rankings / items / properties / previous_rank / description

Previous value: -"Rank at the preceding snapshot week (ATP/WTA only; null elsewhere)."New value: +"Rank at the preceding snapshot week (ATP/WTA only, null elsewhere)."

changedOutput schema / properties / rankings / items / properties / rank_movement / description

Previous value: -"The circuit's own signed weekly movement (ITF systems only)."New value: +"Signed weekly rank movement (ITF systems only)."

changedOutput schema / properties / rankings / items / properties / rating / description
```
Previous value: -"UTR only; null elsewhere."New value: +"UTR only, null elsewhere."
```

AddedAug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the ULTRA plan requirement, the 2026-07-29 history floors for ITF and UTR, the rule that systems are never collapsed, and the guarantee that no record dated after as_of is returned. These are exactly the operational constraints an agent needs.

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 core scope and contrast in the first two sentences, then supporting constraints. It is dense and every sentence carries information, though the terse, fragmented phrasing pushes slightly toward telegraphic rather than economical.

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 3-parameter read tool with an output schema present, the description supplies the plan gating, data availability windows, per-system field differences, and the exact as_of semantics. Little an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 would be 3, but the description adds genuine semantics the schema lacks: 'newest record in force ON OR BEFORE as_of, never one dated after it' sharpens the as_of boundary condition, and 'systems are never collapsed' clarifies the system parameter's behavioral effect. It also notes which fields each system carries (rank+points vs rating).

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 ('point-in-time ranking records for SPECIFIC players') and explicitly contrasts with the rest of the API whose ranking fields are 'CURRENT value joined at read time', which cleanly separates it from the get_rankings sibling. An agent can identify the historical variant without opening a schema.

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 a clear usage context ('This one is the historical answer', 'SPECIFIC players', 'Requires the ULTRA plan'), which tells the agent when the tool is appropriate. It does not name the alternative tool (get_rankings) explicitly or state exclusions such as bulk-listing, 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 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.