Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

futgg_fc27_evolutions

Browse FC27 evolution metadata with native expiry, cosmetic, name, page, and full-list options while preserving source rules, tasks, upgrade choices, metrics, and example cards.

Instructions

Browse FC27 evolution metadata. Reads native expiry/cosmetic/name/page/full-list options and preserves source evolution rules, level tasks, upgrade choices, published metrics and example cards. include_cosmetics=false does not mean every returned isCosmeticEvolution is false; the source option is forwarded without a local partition. Omission preserves the underlying API default; explicitly request include_cosmetics=true to match the current FC27 UI. No eligible-player/path generation, account tracking, biography or local calculation.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "futgg_fc27_evolutions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Native evolution name search, up to1024bytes
`page`	No	One-based source page; omission resolves native page1
`page_size`	No	Native integer size; nonpositive uses source default30; ignored in full mode
`only_expired`	No	Native expired-list selector; explicit false preserved
`no_pagination`	No	Return source data-only full-list mode; ignores paging controls
`include_cosmetics`	No	Native option that widens source cosmetic coverage; not an exclusive type predicate

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.17.20Nov 12, 2026

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 it does substantial work: it warns that include_cosmetics=false does not imply every returned isCosmeticEvolution is false, that the option is forwarded without local partitioning, and that omission preserves the API default. It also scopes out local calculation and account tracking. It stops short of describing response shape, ordering, or result volume in full-list mode.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded and every clause is substantive rather than filler. The middle sentences are dense and slightly run-on, with the include_cosmetics caveat spread across two sentences that could be tightened, but nothing is wasted.

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 six-parameter browse tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, the main behavioral trap, and the negative scope. Return shape is only gestured at through the list of preserved fields, which is a minor gap but not a blocker for correct invocation.

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 baseline would be 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that include_cosmetics is not an exclusive type predicate and explains the forwarding semantics and API-default behavior. It also reinforces the paging-versus-full-list interaction implied by no_pagination.

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 definition opens with a specific verb and resource ('Browse FC27 evolution metadata') and enumerates what is surfaced: source rules, level tasks, upgrade choices, published metrics and example cards. It never names the singular sibling futgg_fc27_evolution, so an agent must infer that this is the list/browse variant and that one is the single-record lookup.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'Browse' plus 'full-list mode' suggests list-retrieval, and there is a genuine negative scope statement ('No eligible-player/path generation, account tracking, biography or local calculation') that tells the agent what this tool will not do. However, no alternative tool is named and there is no explicit condition for choosing this over futgg_fc27_evolution.

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

Deploy Server