teamsList all AFL teams tracked by Squiggle, optionally filtered to a specific year; returns team IDs, names, and abbreviations used across other tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| teams | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / countRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Number of items returned.",
- "type": "integer"
-}Output schema / properties / itemsRemoved value: -{
- "items": {
- "properties": {
- "abbr": {
- "description": "Team abbreviation",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "id": {
- "description": "Team ID",
- "type": "number"
- },
- "name": {
- "description": "Team name",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
- },
- "type": "array"
-}Output schema / properties / teamsAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "abbrev": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "debut": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "logo": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "retirement": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / requiredRemoved value: -[
- "items",
- "count"
-]Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "year": 2024
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "description": "Number of items returned.",
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "items": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "abbr": {
+ "description": "Team abbreviation",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Team ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Team name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "items",
+ "count"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the year filter and the returned data fields, which helps the agent anticipate results without contradicting the annotations.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all AFL teams'), then covers the optional filter and output, with zero extraneous words.
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?
For a tool with one optional parameter and comprehensive safety annotations, the description fully covers the purpose, the filter's effect, and the output contents. No critical information is missing for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the tool.
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?
With no schema descriptions for the parameter, the description compensates by explaining the `year` parameter's purpose as an optional filter. It doesn't detail format or edge cases, but for a simple numeric year filter, this is sufficient.
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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'AFL teams tracked by Squiggle,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle games, ladders, or standings. It also specifies the optional year filter and return fields, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.
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?
The description provides clear context that this tool returns team identifiers used across other tools, implying its role as a reference lookup. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or mention exclusions, so it falls 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.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools occupy overlapping boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-duplicate query entry points (beta is currently identical), while ladder/standings, ai_visibility_check/scan_competitor_ai_presence, and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage also blur together. An agent would struggle to reliably pick the right tool without reading very long descriptions.
The vast majority of names are snake_case and many follow a readable verb_noun shape, such as resolve_entity, validate_claim, and list_subscriptions. However, the Squiggle/AFL tools are bare nouns (games, ladder, sources, standings, teams, tips), and the polymarket_* / pipeworx_* prefixes do not use one consistent verb style, so it is not a fully uniform convention.
37 tools is in the too-many band, and the sprawl is compounded by mixing unrelated domains under one server: AFL stats, a huge Pipeworx data-routing layer, prediction-market analytics, AI visibility checks, npm dependency review, and llms.txt generation. The set feels like several merged servers rather than one well-scoped MCP.
The query/research surface is broad and covers many subdomains, and the subscription lifecycle is reasonably complete with subscribe/list/unsubscribe/recent_alerts. However, pipeworx:// citation URIs are prominently returned but no tool fetches a cited record directly, the AFL side lacks player-level data, and subscriptions cannot be updated.