Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

boxofficemojo_showdown

Retrieve release comparison metrics from Box Office Mojo showdown pages by passing a showdown ID, path, or URL to compare box office performance.

Instructions

Box Office Mojo showdown detail. Returns release comparison metrics from a Box Office Mojo showdown page. Pass exactly one of id, path, or url.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoBox Office Mojo showdown id
urlNoAbsolute https://www.boxofficemojo.com showdown URL
pathNoBox Office Mojo showdown path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0
  2. Removedv1.6.0
  3. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what the tool returns (release comparison metrics from a showdown page), which implies a read-only fetch, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, pagination, or error behavior when none of the three identifiers is supplied.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, zero waste, with the resource and return content front-loaded before the invocation constraint. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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 single-resource detail fetch with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content, and the identifier rule adequately. It could say a bit more about the returned metric structure or the alternative-to-list distinction, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the per-parameter descriptions already carry the basics (baseline 3). The description adds real value beyond the schema by stating a mutual-exclusivity constraint ('pass exactly one of id, path, or url') that the schema itself does not encode via oneOf or required fields.

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 names a specific resource (Box Office Mojo showdown detail) and states the returned content ('release comparison metrics'), so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. It does not, however, differentiate itself from its close sibling boxofficemojo_showdowns (the list variant), leaving that distinction to inference.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling boxofficemojo_showdowns list tool, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The only call-shape instruction ('pass exactly one of id, path, or url') is invocation mechanics rather than usage context.

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