Skip to main content
Glama

Brawl Stars

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Player Battles

player_battles
Read-onlyIdempotent

Brawl Stars official API — recent battle log for a player tag: battle time, event/map, mode, result, star player, teams, and brawlers used per battle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "tag": "#ABC123DEF"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "battle": {
+            "properties": {
+              "duration": {
+                "description": "Battle duration",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "mode": {
+                "description": "Battle mode",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "players": {
+                "description": "Players in battle",
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "object"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              "result": {
+                "description": "Battle result",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "teams": {
+                "description": "Teams in battle",
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "object"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              "trophyChange": {
+                "description": "Trophy change",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "type": {
+                "description": "Battle type",
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "battleTime": {
+            "description": "Battle timestamp",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "event": {
+            "properties": {
+              "id": {
+                "description": "Event ID",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "map": {
+                "description": "Map name",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "mode": {
+                "description": "Game mode",
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'recent' scoping and 'official API' context but does not mention limits, pagination, or authentication. No contradiction.

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?

One clear, front-loaded sentence that immediately names the resource and then lists the data fields. Every word contributes value, no padding.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It names the scope ('recent battle log') and includes key result fields. A minor gap is not specifying how far back 'recent' goes or any limit on number of battles, but the output schema likely provides structure.

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 has 1 parameter (tag) with 0% description coverage. The description only says 'player tag' without explaining the format or encoding, leaving the example '#ABC123DEF' in the schema to carry the burden. This does not compensate for low schema coverage.

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 a specific verb (retrieves) and resource (recent battle log for a player tag) and enumerates the data fields returned. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'player' (likely profile) and 'events_rotation'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool (when you need a player's recent battle history) but provides no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or 'when not to use' guidance. The sibling list is not referenced in the description.

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

All Brawl Stars 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