rankings_clansClash Royale official API — top-ranked clans for a location ID (numeric): clan name, tag, score, member count, and rank position. Use global ID for worldwide rankings.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| locationId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | No | Ranked clans | |
| paging | No | Pagination info |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "locationId": 57000
+ },
+ {
+ "limit": 25,
+ "locationId": 57000
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "items": {
+ "description": "Ranked clans",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "badgeId": {
+ "description": "Badge ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "clanScore": {
+ "description": "Clan score",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "location": {
+ "description": "Location",
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "memberCount": {
+ "description": "Member count",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Clan name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "previousRank": {
+ "description": "Previous ranking",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "rank": {
+ "description": "Ranking position",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "tag": {
+ "description": "Clan tag",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "description": "Clan type",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "paging": {
+ "description": "Pagination info",
+ "properties": {
+ "cursors": {
+ "description": "Pagination cursors",
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it is the official API and lists the returned fields (clan name, tag, score, member count, rank position), but does not disclose pagination or sorting behavior beyond 'top-ranked'. This adds moderate value but not rich behavioral context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is exactly two sentences: the first delivers the primary purpose and output fields, the second provides a key parameter hint. No wasted words, and critical information is front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a simple list tool with an output schema, strong annotations (read-only, idempotent, open world), and a clear one-line description of the data returned. For its complexity, the description plus structured metadata is fully sufficient — nothing necessary is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that locationId is numeric and that 'global ID' is used for worldwide rankings, which gives meaningful semantic guidance for that parameter. However, the 'limit' parameter is not addressed in the description, leaving it undocumented in both schema and description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific action ('top-ranked clans for a location ID') and resource (clans), and distinguishes from the sibling 'rankings_players' tool by focusing on clans. It also clarifies the numeric location ID and global ID usage, making the purpose unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It provides clear context for when to use the tool (for location-specific top clan rankings) and gives explicit guidance to 'Use global ID for worldwide rankings'. However, it doesn't name alternative tools or explicitly state when NOT to use this tool, so it falls short of the highest bar.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.