Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

flashscore_team_transfers

Flashscore team transfers. Returns one page (30 rows) of a team's transfer history, newest first: date, direction (in or out), type such as Loan or Transfer, fee text, the player and the clubs on each side.

Instructions

Flashscore team transfers. Returns one page (30 rows) of a team's transfer history, newest first: date, direction (in or out), type such as Loan or Transfer, fee text, the player and the clubs on each side. Filter by type to see arrivals or departures only. Request successive pages until transfer_count is 0.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEight-character Flashscore team id
pageNo1-based page from 1 to 300; defaults to 1
typeNoTransfer direction filter; defaults to all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.12

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
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 discloses page size (30 rows), sort order (newest first), the returned fields, and the termination condition for pagination. It omits any note on auth, rate limits, or pagination bounds (though page max is in the schema), keeping it from a 5.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the tool's identity and scope, then return fields, then usage. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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, so the description compensates by enumerating the return fields and explaining pagination. It is nearly complete for a read-only listing tool, missing only minor details like page bounds already present in the schema.

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 the schema already documents id, page, and type. The description reinforces the type filter's meaning (arrivals/departures) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, 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 opens with a clear verb+resource ('Flashscore team transfers') and specifies the scope ('a team's transfer history'), which distinguishes it from the player-transfer sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative, but the team-vs-player distinction is inherent in the wording.

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?

It gives operational guidance ('Filter by type to see arrivals or departures only') and pagination instructions ('Request successive pages until transfer_count is 0'), which is useful. However, it never states when to choose this tool over siblings like flashscore_player_transfers or flashscore_team, leaving that to inference.

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