Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

metaculus_questions

Fetch Metaculus forecasting question rows by optional topic slug and limit; returns an error instead of partial data when the source requires authentication or shows a challenge.

Instructions

Metaculus questions. Returns Metaculus question rows. The endpoint fails closed, returning an error instead of partial data, when the source responds with an authenticated-only response or a challenge page.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRows to return, default 10, max 25
topicNoOptional Metaculus topic slug

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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. It does disclose a genuinely useful failure mode — the endpoint 'fails closed, returning an error instead of partial data' on authenticated-only or challenge responses. However it omits other behavioral traits such as pagination, default ordering, and whether an empty topic means all questions.

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 short and front-loaded, with no filler beyond the redundant opening 'Metaculus questions.' sentence. The behavioral note is compact and directly comparable to the operation.

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 two-optional-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation and one notable failure mode but says nothing about the shape/fields of a 'question row' or ordering. It is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent to call it confidently.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (limit, topic) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning such as what a topic slug looks like or how topic filtering interacts with the sibling category tools, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states a verb (returns) and resource (Metaculus question rows), which is understandable. However, the first sentence 'Metaculus questions' essentially restates the tool name, and it never distinguishes this general listing from the many sibling variants (metaculus_category_questions, metaculus_project_questions, metaculus_tournament_questions). It sits between vague and clear.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the category/project/tournament-filtered siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The agent must infer that this is the unfiltered general endpoint from the name alone.

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