Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

formula1_team

Retrieve a Formula 1 team's profile by slug, including drivers, season and career statistics, base, team chief, and power unit details.

Instructions

One Formula 1 team profile. Returns one team profile: team name, the current drivers the profile lists with their profile slugs, the season the statistics describe, the current-season statistics and the career statistics, plus profile facts such as full team name, base, team chief and power unit.

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": {
      "team_slug": "<team_slug>"
    },
    "name": "formula1_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
team_slugYesTeam profile slug from a season page or standings row, such as mercedes example(mercedes)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does well by spelling out exactly what is returned and that both current-season and career statistics are included, but it says nothing about failure behavior for an unknown slug, whether the response can be empty for a new team, or any rate/access constraints.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening two sentences are redundant ('One Formula 1 team profile. Returns one team profile:') and the second sentence is a long comma-chained list. It is front-loaded and relatively short, but the duplicated framing wastes space that could have carried usage guidance.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates well by fully enumerating the returned fields, including profile facts like base, team chief and power unit. Only sibling differentiation and error behavior are missing, which are minor for a lookup of this simplicity.

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%: the sole parameter already documents that team_slug is a profile slug sourced from a season page or standings row, with an example. The description adds no additional meaning about slug format or resolution beyond that, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Returns one team profile') and enumerates the payload: team name, listed drivers with profile slugs, season, current-season and career statistics, plus profile facts. This is clearly a single-team profile lookup rather than a grid or standings listing, though no sibling (e.g., formula1_team_standings or formula1_team_season_results) is named as a contrast.

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 tool is referenced despite several similarly named team tools. At best the sense of usage is implied by the phrase 'one team profile', leaving the agent to infer routing from tool names alone.

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