Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

boardgamegeek_recommendations

Retrieve BoardGameGeek 'fans also like' recommendations for a given game ID, including each suggested game's name, image, rating, rank, year, and fan count.

Instructions

Get BoardGameGeek recommendations for a game. Returns BoardGameGeek's "fans also like" recommendations for one game: each suggested item's identity, name and image, plus the source's similarity rating, rank, voter count, year published and fan count. An unknown game id yields a valid empty list with count 0 rather than an error.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "boardgamegeek_recommendations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesBoardGameGeek game id, positive integer; Catan is 13
showcountNoMaximum number of recommendations, 1-50

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

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 does well: it enumerates the returned fields (identity, name, image, similarity rating, rank, voter count, year published, fan count) and explicitly discloses error semantics — an unknown id yields an empty list with count 0 rather than an error. It omits rate limits, auth needs, and how the count field relates to the showcount parameter.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then return shape, then the edge-case behavior. The field enumeration is dense but each item is informative; nothing is redundant.

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?

No output schema and no annotations exist, so the description must convey return shape and error behavior — and it does both. The remaining gap is the showcount parameter's effect on the result size, which neither the description nor structured fields explain beyond the numeric range.

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%, with the schema already documenting the id format ('Catan is 13') and showcount range (1-50). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that and never mentions showcount or any default/maximum behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get BoardGameGeek recommendations'), quotes the underlying feature set ('fans also like'), and scopes it to a single game. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as boardgamegeek_game, but the resource word 'recommendations' is distinct enough to separate it from a detail lookup.

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: call this when you already have a game id and want related games. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of an alternative tool for broader discovery, and no statement of prerequisites beyond the required 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