Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Crawlora MCP

by net.crawlora
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

liquipedia_backlinks

Read-only

Lists pages linking to one selected page on a Liquipedia wiki with namespace, redirect, limit, and continuation filters. Use wiki slugs from liquipedia_wikis and namespace IDs from liquipedia_enums; preserve Liquipedia attribution.

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": {
      "wiki": "<wiki>"
    },
    "name": "liquipedia_backlinks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wikiYesRequired Liquipedia wiki slug from liquipedia_wikis.
bldirNoOptional source ordering direction.
bllimitNoPage size from 1 through 500, or the string max; source default is 10.
bltitleNoSource target page title; mutually exclusive with blpageid.
blpageidNoSource target page ID; mutually exclusive with bltitle.
continueNoOptional global MediaWiki continuation value.
blcontinueNoOptional native backlinks continuation value.
blredirectNoInclude backlinks to redirects of the selected target page.
blnamespaceNoRepeatable source namespace IDs as numbers, or the string * for all namespaces.
blfilterredirNoOptional source redirect filter.

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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description contributes one genuinely behavioral constraint, the requirement to preserve Liquipedia attribution, plus the existence of continuation-based pagination, but says nothing about how pagination terminates or what the response contains.

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 sentences, no filler: the first front-loads what the tool returns and its filter set, the second carries the input-provenance and attribution guidance. Nothing redundant with the name or schema is repeated at length.

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?

With an output schema, full schema coverage, and read-only annotations, the description only needs to convey purpose, input sourcing, and obligations, all of which are present. The remaining gap is pagination behavior for a continuation-based tool with 10 parameters, which an agent mid-pagination would benefit from knowing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% across all 10 parameters, so the schema already explains bltitle/blpageid exclusivity, bllimit bounds, and blnamespace semantics. The description only summarizes the filter families (namespace, redirect, limit, continuation) without adding syntax or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, making the 3 baseline appropriate.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("lists pages linking to one selected page") and scopes it to a single Liquipedia wiki, which separates it from a generic links listing. It does not explicitly name liquipedia_links as the outbound counterpart, so the sibling differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

It gives useful prerequisite guidance: wiki slugs come from liquipedia_wikis and namespace IDs from liquipedia_enums, which tells an agent how to obtain valid inputs before calling. However, it never states when to choose this tool over liquipedia_links or other page tools, and offers no exclusions.

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

All Crawlora MCP 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