Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

itchio_jams_submission

Retrieve an itch.io jam submission's public metadata and published per-criterion scores, including project and jam identity, title, summary, submitter credits, and results availability.

Instructions

Read itch.io jam submission metadata and scores. Returns the public submission's project/jam identity, title, summary, submitter credits and published per-criterion rank/score/raw-score strings. Preserves n/a manual scores and source ordering. results_available:false means the anonymous page provides no published score table; it does not assert that private or future results do not exist. Individual votes, comments, arbitrary custom answers, judge feedback and account actions are excluded.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "itchio_jams_submission"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesNative relative /jam/slug/rate/project-id link from entries or results

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?

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full load, and it does so well: it discloses that results are per-criterion strings, that manual n/a scores and source ordering are preserved, and critically explains that results_available:false means only that the anonymous page lacks a published score table rather than asserting no private results exist. It also enumerates exclusions (individual votes, comments, custom answers, judge feedback, account actions), though it says nothing about access level, caching, or failure modes.

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 sentences with a clear front-loaded purpose statement, followed by return contents, a caveat about the results_available flag, and an exclusion list. Every sentence contributes, though the second and third sentences are densely packed with field names that could be skimmed past.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the return-value semantics the structured fields do not, including the meaning of results_available:false. Only the omission of error behavior for a malformed path keeps it from fully complete.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents the path argument and the description adds no further syntax or format detail beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.

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 itch.io jam submission metadata and scores") and enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what domain of data this covers. It does not explicitly name when to reach for this over the sibling itchio_jams_results or itchio_jams_entries tools, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 only implied: the single required input is described as a native relative link obtained "from entries or results," which hints at the browse-then-fetch workflow but never states it as an instruction. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements relative to the sibling jam tools, so the guidance is adequate but inferential.

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