Skip to main content
Glama

faceit_team

Read-only

Get FACEIT team profile by id. Returns one public FACEIT team profile: name and nickname, game, leader, team type and status, description, country, avatar and cover, creation/update timestamps, social links, member and pending-member ids, and public member rows (guid, nickname, avatar, country and game list). Team ids are discovered from premade championship bracket faction ids in faceit-championship-bracket. An unknown id answers 404 and is returned as NotFound.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "faceit_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRequired team UUID; team ids appear as premade bracket faction ids in faceit-championship-bracket.

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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, it discloses that only public profile data is returned and specifies error behavior — an unknown id returns 404 surfaced as NotFound. That is real behavioral context an agent needs for error handling, though it says nothing about rate limits or whether private teams are excluded.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is correctly front-loaded in the first sentence, but the long return-field enumeration largely duplicates the output schema and does not earn its space. The key behavioral point (404/NotFound) is buried at the end instead of being surfaced earlier.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values did not need restating, yet the description still covers purpose, id provenance, and not-found behavior, leaving no functional gap for calling the tool. The redundant field list is a minor efficiency issue rather than a completeness one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the id fully. The description repeats the same discovery hint found in the schema's id description rather than adding new meaning, so it sits at the baseline.

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 ('Get FACEIT team profile by id') and then enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what this returns. It is clearly distinct from the player-oriented sibling (faceit_player) without needing to name it.

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?

Gives the concrete prerequisite that the id is a team UUID discovered from premade bracket faction ids in faceit-championship-bracket, which is genuinely actionable routing. It does not name an alternative team-lookup tool or state when not to use this, 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.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.