Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bo3_match_history

Retrieve esports match history for a single game from BO3.gg, filtered by status, tier, and date range, with paging, sorting, scores, teams, maps, tournaments, and AI predictions.

Instructions

BO3.gg esports match history. Returns BO3.gg's esports match history for one game, newest first by default, with paging and filters: status (finished, defwin, upcoming, current, canceled, postponed; the default is finished and default-win matches together), tier (s to d), an inclusive from/to day range (UTC), sort and offset/limit (up to 100 per page). Each match has teams, scores, winner, best-of, tournament, maps and the site's AI prediction; total and has_more page through the full history.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoLast start day, YYYY-MM-DD (UTC, inclusive)
fromNoFirst start day, YYYY-MM-DD (UTC, inclusive)
gameNoGame; one of cs2, valorant, lol, dota2, r6siege, mlbb; defaults to cs2
sortNoOrder by start time; one of newest, oldest; defaults to newest
tierNoTournament tier; one of s, a, b, c, d
limitNoPage size, 1 to 100; defaults to 20
offsetNoZero-based offset; defaults to 0
statusNoMatch status; one of finished, defwin, upcoming, current, canceled, postponed; defaults to finished and defwin together

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.18

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
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 meaningful work: it states ordering (newest first by default), the non-obvious default status combination, the inclusive UTC day range, and the paging envelope (total and has_more, up to 100 per page). What it omits is the safety or side-effect profile (presumably read-only) and failure behavior, which keeps it below 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and default order, then the filter inventory. The parenthetical enum dumps inflate it slightly and duplicate the schema, but nothing is wasted overall.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields (teams, scores, winner, best-of, tournament, maps, AI prediction) plus the paging fields. Combined with the defaults and filter semantics, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 every parameter, including enums and defaults. The description restates the filter set and adds only the 'up to 100 per page' framing, which the schema also carries. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: it returns BO3.gg esports match history for a single game, with filters and paging. The scope (one game, newest first) is clear enough that an agent knows what it gets. It never names the sibling bo3_match (single match) or bo3_team_recent_matches to differentiate itself, so it stops short of a 5.

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 implied by the filter list: use status and date range to narrow history. The default status semantics (finished plus defwin together) are useful context for how the call behaves. But there is no explicit statement of when to choose this over bo3_match or bo3_tournament, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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