Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

hltv_event

Retrieve a Counter-Strike event overview by numeric HLTV event ID, including status, dates, prize pool, location, and attending teams with rankings.

Instructions

Get a Counter-Strike event overview. Returns one event's public HLTV overview page by numeric id: name, canonical URL, status (finished, ongoing, or upcoming), start/end dates in UTC, total prize pool, participating team count, location, and the attending teams with their ids, logos and the HLTV/Valve ranking positions shown at event start. The trailing slug is cosmetic and optional; HLTV resolves the event by id. Use hltv-events to discover event ids.

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": "hltv_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesHLTV numeric event id
slugNoCosmetic event slug; HLTV resolves the event by id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
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 does well: it discloses that the page is public, that lookup is by id, that slug is purely cosmetic, the exact status vocabulary, and that dates are UTC. Missing only edge behavior such as invalid-id errors, rate limits, or whether team/ranking data can be absent for upcoming events.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose in the first clause, followed by return fields and then the discovery hint. The field enumeration is long but each item is informative; a slightly tighter phrasing of the return list would lose no meaning.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must describe return values, and it does so thoroughly (name, URL, status, dates, prize pool, team count, location, team ids/logos/rankings). It is nearly complete for a simple two-parameter read tool, with only error/availability caveats absent.

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 both parameter descriptions already state that id is the numeric HLTV event id and slug is cosmetic because HLTV resolves by id. The description's parameter notes largely restate those schema strings, so it adds little new meaning beyond the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get a Counter-Strike event overview", "Returns one event's public HLTV overview page by numeric id") and enumerates the payload, which distinguishes it cleanly from list-oriented siblings like hltv_events and from match-level tools such as hltv_match.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit routing guidance for obtaining the required id ("Use hltv-events to discover event ids"), which is the main precondition for calling this. It stops short of stating when-not to use it (e.g., versus hltv_match or hltv_team) or any exclusion conditions.

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