Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

faceit_standings

Retrieve FACEIT championship standings by group and round, including leaderboard identity and ranked participant positions, points, skill level, and country. Returns an empty list if none exist.

Instructions

FACEIT championship standings by group and round. Returns a championship's standings for one group and round: the leaderboard identity and each ranked participant's entity id, name, avatar, skill level, country, played count, position and points. The upstream requires group and round plus a segment or match number. An entity or round without standings is a valid empty list, 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": {
      "entity_id": "<entity_id>",
      "group": "<group>",
      "round": "<round>"
    },
    "name": "faceit_standings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`group`	Yes	Group number.
`match`	No	Optional match number; provide segment or match.
`round`	Yes	Round number, or a comma-separated list such as 1,2.
`segment`	No	Optional segment number; provide segment or match.
`entity_id`	Yes	Championship UUID from faceit-championship-search.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.17.20Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the return payload contents, the upstream input requirement (segment or match in addition to group and round), and an important edge-case contract — 'An entity or round without standings is a valid empty list, not an error.' It leaves out auth/permission needs and pagination, but the error-semantics disclosure is the highest-value piece for an agent deciding how to interpret results.

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 dense sentences with no filler, front-loaded with purpose and followed by return shape then edge-case behavior. The middle sentence is a long enumeration of returned fields, which is justifiable since no output schema exists, but it is the only slightly bloated element.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must cover both purpose and return values — and it does, listing the participant fields plus the empty-list semantics. For a five-parameter read tool this is close to sufficient; only auth requirements and result ordering/pagination are absent.

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 all five parameters, and much of the description's parameter content (entity_id as a championship UUID, group/round, segment-or-match) restates it. The one additive nuance is that group and round are required while segment/match form an either-or pair at the upstream level. 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'FACEIT championship standings by group and round,' and then enumerates the returned fields (leaderboard identity, participant entity id, name, avatar, skill level, country, played, position, points). It is clearly distinguishable from generic standings siblings by the FACEIT championship/group/round framing. It doesn't explicitly position itself against near-neighbors like faceit_championship_bracket, which keeps it off 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?

Guidance is implied through constraints rather than stated as when-to-use: 'The upstream requires group and round plus a segment or match number' tells the agent the valid call shape, and the entity_id lineage ('Championship UUID from faceit-championship-search') hints at the prerequisite lookup tool. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over bracket/participants tools or when not to call it.

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

Deploy Server