Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

flashscore_match_incidents

Fetch a structured Flashscore match incident timeline by match ID to get period, clock, team side, and ordered goal, assist, substitution, and event actions.

Instructions

Flashscore structured match incidents. Fetch the structured Flashscore incident timeline by match ID with period, displayed clock, team side and ordered actions. An incident can group a goal and assist or both players in a substitution. Valid summaries without incidents return an empty list. Use flashscore_match_commentary for editorial text.

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": "flashscore_match_incidents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEight-character Flashscore match ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full load and does reasonably well: it discloses the returned fields (period, displayed clock, team side, ordered actions), explains that one incident can group a goal with its assist or both players in a substitution, and states that a valid match without incidents yields an empty list rather than an error. It says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or pagination, but this is a read-only lookup where those are largely irrelevant.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ending with the disambiguation pointer. The opening fragment 'Flashscore structured match incidents' slightly duplicates the following sentence, but overall there is no filler.

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, so the description must describe return values, and it does: the field set, the grouping semantics for goals/assists and substitutions, and the empty-list edge case. Combined with the 100%-covered single parameter, 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% and the single 'id' parameter is fully documented as an eight-character Flashscore match ID, so the description only needs to restate that the fetch is by match ID. It adds no format, validation, or lookup guidance beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline-3 outcome.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch the structured Flashscore incident timeline by match ID') and immediately scopes it against the sibling 'flashscore_match_commentary' for editorial text. An agent can distinguish this from the many other flashscore_match_* siblings without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes editorial-text needs to flashscore_match_commentary, which is the closest competing tool, and the 'structured timeline' framing implies the when-to-use case. It stops short of naming other timeline-adjacent siblings (e.g. point-by-point, momentum), but per the guidance rule that is not held against it.

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