Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

futgg_fc27_sbc_set

Read FC27 SBC set details by source slug and return set, challenge, condition, reward metadata, and published prices while preserving IDs, order, and nullable values.

Instructions

Read FC27 SBC set detail. Reads a source-provided FC27 set slug and returns native set, challenge, condition/reward metadata and published prices. Preserves source IDs, order, repeatability and nullable values. Excludes biography, account/render flags and unreviewed editorial blobs. Does not execute a solver or access a private club.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "futgg_fc27_sbc_set"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesNative FC27 slug from listing, for example27-125-riccardo-calafiori

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses preserved source IDs, ordering, repeatability and nullable values, and explicitly excludes biography, account/render flags and unreviewed editorial blobs. It also rules out side effects ("does not execute a solver or access a private club"). Auth requirements and error behavior for an invalid slug remain unstated.

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 and return contents are front-loaded in the first two sentences, with exclusions following. It is dense but nearly every clause conveys a real constraint; the exclusion list is slightly list-like and could be tightened.

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?

A single-parameter read tool with no output schema needs the description to say what comes back, and it does: set, challenge, condition/reward metadata and prices, plus what is deliberately omitted. Remaining gaps are minor – no slug-validation or not-found behavior, and no explicit routing to sibling lookup variants.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter already carries an example format, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only reinforces that the slug is "source-provided" and must be the native form, adding little syntax or validation detail beyond that.

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 specific verb and resource ("Read FC27 SBC set detail") and enumerates what comes back: native set, challenge, condition/reward metadata and published prices. It is clearly distinct from list-style siblings such as futgg_fc27_sbc_sets, but it never names an alternative, so an agent must infer the boundary with futgg_fc27_sbc_set_by_challenge or _by_ea on its own.

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: reading a "source-provided FC27 set slug" tells the agent this is a by-identifier lookup and that the slug must come from a listing first. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no mention of the by_challenge/by_ea variants that would be the natural alternatives for the same set data.

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