Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

anime_title_characters

Fetch an anime's cast by AniList ID, sorted by billed role, returning character names, roles, images, favourites, and paginated results.

Instructions

List an anime's characters. Lists the cast of an anime by its AniList anime id, sorted by billed role. Each character has name, native_name, role (such as MAIN or SUPPORTING), image, favourites and site_url. Paged with page (default 1) and per_page (default 10, max 50), with total and has_next_page.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAniList anime id
pageNo1-based page number, default 1
per_pageNoResults per page, default 10, max 50

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0
  2. Removedv1.6.0
  3. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses sort order (billed role), the returned fields including role values (MAIN/SUPPORTING), and pagination behavior with defaults, maximums and total/has_next_page. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but for a plain read listing this is solid disclosure.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action, then efficiently packs return fields and pagination into a second clause. The field enumeration is long but earns its place since there is no output schema to carry it.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by describing returned fields, sort order and pagination outcome fields. Complete enough to call correctly; only the sibling boundary and auth/rate context are missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents id, page and per_page with their defaults and max. The description restates the same pagination details and adds no meaning beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List an anime's characters') plus the source key (AniList anime id) and sort order. It is clear, but it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like anime_character or anime_character_search, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'by its AniList anime id' tells the agent it needs an anime id, which is context. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative such as anime_character_search for finding characters without a title id.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools