about_kicksmashWhat Kicksmash is and how to use it: matches, levels, groups, boards, the API and what we ask of assistants. Read this once before acting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those. The description adds useful context about the tool's content coverage, including the API and expectations for assistants, which goes beyond structured 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, compact sentence that front-loads the purpose and immediately gives an actionable instruction. It lists the covered topics efficiently without wasting 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 zero-parameter informational tool, the description is complete: it states what the tool is, what topics it covers, and how the assistant should use it. No output schema or parameter fields create additional requirements, and the annotations already cover the safety profile.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids inventing unnecessary parameter details.
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 clearly identifies the tool as an informational onboarding resource: 'What Kicksmash is and how to use it' with a concrete list of covered topics. It is immediately distinguishable from the action-oriented sibling tools like create_match or find_matches.
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?
It gives an explicit usage instruction: 'Read this once before acting,' which tells the agent when to invoke it relative to other operations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions to skip it, but its role as a prerequisite resource is strongly implied.
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.
Each tool targets a clearly distinct resource or action: about/API key, match creation, club searching, match searching, schedule generation, group retrieval, match retrieval, and joining. Even similar tools like find_matches and get_match are separated by clear inputs and purposes.
Nearly all tools follow the verb_noun pattern: create_match, find_clubs, find_matches, generate_schedule, get_group, get_match, join_match, create_api_key. The only deviation is about_kicksmash, which uses a preposition-style prefix instead of a verb.
Nine tools is well-scoped for a padel-focused assistant. Each tool serves a distinct user need without redundancy or bloat.
The core workflows—discovering clubs/matches, creating matches, joining matches, retrieving match/group info, and generating schedules—are well covered. Update/cancel/leave operations are absent, but the organizer manageUrl suggests those happen outside the MCP surface, so this is a minor gap rather than a dead end.