Skip to main content
Glama

Nhl Get Scores

nhl_get_scores
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get today's NHL game scores and status (live, final, or scheduled). Returns teams, scores, shots on goal, and current period.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "nhl_get_scores"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesCurrent date
gamesYes
total_gamesYesTotal number of games

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content context — the live/final/scheduled status states and the per-game fields — but says nothing about pagination, refresh cadence, or timezone handling for "today".

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the return payload summarized immediately after. Every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema and full annotation set already carry the return shape and safety semantics, so the description only needs the purpose and scope, which it supplies. The one residual gap is the unspecified date/timezone boundary behind "today", minor for a zero-argument read tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and the schema is trivially complete with an empty properties object.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetch today's NHL game scores plus status values (live, final, scheduled) and the exact fields returned. It is clearly not a schedule or standings tool, though it never names the sibling alternatives explicitly.

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 word "today's" implicitly scopes usage to the current day's games, which nudges an agent away from schedule/historical lookups. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to nhl_get_schedule or nhl_get_standings.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.