Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

futgg_fc27_gg_ratings

Retrieve FC27 published GG ratings as a complete native dataset with delta-coded EA item IDs, positions, and scaled scores, preserving source fields and sentinel values for reliable analysis.

Instructions

Get FC27 published GG ratings. Returns the complete native compact rating dataset with delta-coded EA item IDs, positions and scaled scores. Source fields, order, wire version and sentinel values remain intact. Publication references refresh automatically.

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_gg_ratings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the returned data includes delta-coded EA item IDs, positions and scaled scores, that source fields/order/wire version/sentinel values remain intact, and that publication references refresh automatically. It does not mention read-only status explicitly, but 'Get' and 'Returns' strongly imply a read operation.

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 description is four sentences and front-loads the purpose before adding return and refresh details. Each sentence contributes useful information, though technical phrases like 'delta-coded EA item IDs' and 'wire version' could be opaque without domain context. There is no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description explains the return dataset's contents and integrity guarantees reasonably well. It does not specify the exact response structure (e.g., array vs object), but it gives enough context for an agent to know what to expect. The main missing piece is explicit usage routing against the ratings-ranks sibling.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to document. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4. The description appropriately does not fabricate parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get FC27 published GG ratings.' It adds that the tool returns the complete native compact rating dataset, clarifying the scope. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling futgg_fc27_gg_rating_ranks tool, leaving some ambiguity about which one to choose.

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 guidance, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no named alternative. The word 'complete' implies this is for full datasets rather than ranked subsets, but the agent must infer that without confirmation. A clear routing statement to futgg_fc27_gg_rating_ranks is missing.

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