Skip to main content
Glama

yahoo_sports_watch_schedule

Read-only

List Yahoo Sports' current Watch program schedule with titles, dates, descriptions, ratings, and sport metadata. The source has no date, league, filter, or pagination parameters; use yahoo_sports_video_list_catalog for video-list IDs.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: no filtering, no pagination, and no date scoping, meaning the caller gets the full current schedule in one shot and cannot narrow it. That is the key operational constraint for this 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The scope and returned fields come first, followed by the no-parameters constraint and the sibling pointer, both of which earn their place.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything needed: what comes back, that no narrowing is possible, and where to go for the adjacent data set.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces this by explicitly stating there are no date/league/filter/pagination parameters, closing off any assumption that hidden options exist.

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?

Specific verb ('List') plus a specific resource ('Yahoo Sports' current Watch program schedule') and the exact fields returned (titles, dates, descriptions, ratings, sport metadata). It also names a related sibling, so an agent can distinguish it from yahoo_sports_video_list_catalog without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly states that the source has no date, league, filter, or pagination parameters, which tells the agent this is an unfiltered 'fetch everything current' call and prevents futile parameter attempts. It also routes to yahoo_sports_video_list_catalog for video-list IDs. It stops short of stating when *not* to use this tool, hence not 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.