Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

futgg_fc27_objective_group_by_objective

Retrieve the FC27 parent group for a child EA objective ID, distinguishing EA group IDs from database IDs without returning standalone task data or mutating completion.

Instructions

Read FC27 parent group by EA objective ID. Uses objectivesEaIds or objectives[].eaId and returns the parent group, not a standalone task DTO. EA group IDs and database IDs are distinct. No account tracking, biography or completion mutation.

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": "futgg_fc27_objective_group_by_objective"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPositive child EA objective ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
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, and it does add real context: the lookup key is an EA objective ID, EA group IDs differ from database IDs, and the response is a parent group rather than a task DTO. It omits error behavior for invalid IDs, pagination, and any sense of response shape. That leaves meaningful gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler; purpose comes first. The fragment 'Uses objectivesEaIds or objectives[].eaId' is terse enough to be slightly cryptic to a reader unfamiliar with the payload shape, and the negative scoping clause reads as an afterthought.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers identity of the key and the fact that a parent group is returned. It does not describe the returned group's fields or what happens when a non-group objective ID is supplied, which matters because it explicitly distinguishes IDs and DTO types.

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% (one parameter, 'Positive child EA objective ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning by mapping the ID to the source fields objectivesEaIds / objectives[].eaId, telling the agent where the value comes from. It still does not clarify what 'positive child' implies for valid ranges.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read FC27 parent group by EA objective ID.' It also disambiguates the return shape ('returns the parent group, not a standalone task DTO'), which separates it from a task-level lookup. It stops short of naming sibling tools such as futgg_fc27_objective_group_by_ea, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative sibling is named. The clause 'No account tracking, biography or completion mutation' hints at scope but does not tell the agent which other tool to pick for those needs. Usage is only inferable from the one-line purpose.

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