Skip to main content
Glama

Football Data

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Competitions

list_competitions
Read-onlyIdempotent

List competitions accessible on your plan. Free tier: 12 majors. Use the returned code (e.g., "PL", "PD", "CL") for downstream calls.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesTotal number of competitions
competitionsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {}
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "competitions": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "area": {
+            "description": "Geographic area name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "code": {
+            "description": "Competition code (e.g., PL, PD, CL)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "current_matchday": {
+            "description": "Current matchday number",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "current_season_end": {
+            "description": "Current season end date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "current_season_start": {
+            "description": "Current season start date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "emblem": {
+            "description": "Competition emblem URL",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Competition ID",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Competition name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "plan": {
+            "description": "Availability plan tier",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "description": "Competition type",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Total number of competitions",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "competitions"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the free tier limitation (12 majors) and the output field 'code'. Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent, so the description complements well without redundancy.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose; the second adds actionable detail. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given no parameters and existence of an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, its limitations, and how to use the results. No gaps.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so baseline 4 applies. The description does not need to add parameter details and instead focuses on the output and usage.

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 clearly states the tool lists competitions accessible on the user's plan, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_competition_matches' by being the top-level listing endpoint.

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 explains the free tier limitation and instructs to use the returned 'code' for downstream calls, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or list alternatives.

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

All Football Data 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