Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

boardgamegeek_reviews

Retrieve hot and recent text and video reviews for a BoardGameGeek object by type and ID, including review totals and links to full review lists.

Instructions

List a BoardGameGeek object's reviews. Returns an object's hot and recent reviews as the source publishes them: text review threads (thread id, subject, forum, author, dates, post count) and video reviews (video id, host, external id, title, language, thumbnail), with the source's review totals and the paths to the full review lists. An object with no reviews is a valid empty result, not 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": {
      "type": "<type>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "boardgamegeek_reviews"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesObject identifier, positive integer; Catan is 13
typeYesObject type

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
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 so well: it enumerates the returned fields for both text review threads and video reviews, mentions the source's review totals and paths to full lists, and explicitly states that an empty review set is a valid result rather than an error. Remaining gaps are pagination and any rate-limit or auth notes, but the key behavioral contract is disclosed.

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 action and resource, then the return detail. The parenthetical field enumerations are long but earn their place because no output schema exists; nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition covers purpose, return shape, and the empty-result edge case — enough to call it correctly. It stops short of explaining the distinction between 'hot' and 'recent' review sections or how the 'paths to full review lists' should be consumed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both `id` and the `type` enum are already documented structurally. The description reinforces that the target is a 'BoardGameGeek object' (i.e. any of the six types), but adds no format, constraint, or example beyond what the schema provides — 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'List a BoardGameGeek object's reviews,' and clarifies the object is any BGG entity (thing/family/person/etc. per the schema). It does not name a sibling to distinguish from (e.g. boardgamegeek_threads or boardgamegeek_media), so an agent must infer that this is the aggregated review view rather than the thread or media view.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative named. The purpose implies 'use this to get reviews for a BGG object,' but nothing tells an agent whether to prefer boardgamegeek_threads, boardgamegeek_media, or boardgamegeek_entity for the same underlying content.

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