Skip to main content
Glama

Crawlora MCP

opendota_league

Read-only

Returns one Dota 2 league by id: name, tier (amateur, excluded, premium, professional or unrated), ticket and banner, plus the teams that played in it with rating and record. Provide league_id from opendota_leagues; unknown ids return not found. Use opendota_league_matches for its games.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "league_id": "<league_id>"
    },
    "name": "opendota_league"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
league_idYesRequired positive OpenDota league ID from opendota_leagues.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond that: it describes the returned fields and the not-found behavior for unknown ids. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but those are minor for this single-record read tool.

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?

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by input sourcing and sibling routing. Every sentence adds operational value.

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 a single required parameter, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is complete enough for correct selection and invocation. It covers output content, ID sourcing, invalid-ID behavior, and the relevant sibling 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents league_id as required and positive. The description adds value by naming opendota_leagues as the source of the ID and by stating that unknown ids return not found.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: returns one Dota 2 league by id. It enumerates the returned fields including name, tier, ticket/banner, and teams with rating and record, and it distinguishes itself from siblings by naming opendota_leagues as the ID source and opendota_league_matches as the games tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says to provide league_id from opendota_leagues and directs agents to opendota_league_matches for its games. It also sets expectations for invalid input by noting unknown ids return not found.

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.

Resources