Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

motogp_entries

Read a MotoGP event category's published entry list and return native entries with rider, country, number, team, constructor, and wildcard/replacement/rookie data. Validates event-category context.

Instructions

Read a MotoGP event category's published entry list. Returns the whole native entry array and optional report link. Preserves professional rider identities, countries, numbers, team/constructor data and published wildcard/replacement/rookie flags. Validates the event's category context before reading entries. Does not reconcile entries with grids or infer active riders.

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": {
      "event_uuid": "<event_uuid>",
      "category_uuid": "<category_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "motogp_entries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_uuidYesResult-event UUID from entry/grid options or event discovery
category_uuidYesResult-category UUID from that event's category discovery

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the return shape (whole native entry array plus optional report link), the field fidelity preserved (rider identities, countries, numbers, team/constructor, wildcard/replacement/rookie flags), a validation step before reading, and explicit non-behaviors. It does not discuss pagination, failure modes, or permissions, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 the action and resource, then return contents, then constraints and exclusions. Sentences are dense but mostly earn their place; the field-fidelity list is slightly long but materially informs what comes back.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers inputs, return contents, validation behavior, and boundaries well enough to call it correctly. Minor gaps around error/pagination behavior are low-risk for a read-only list operation.

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 UUIDs are documented with their source (event discovery, category discovery). The description adds only the implicit constraint that the category must belong to the given event via its context-validation note, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Read a MotoGP event category's published entry list') and scopes it tightly to an event-category pair. The closing exclusions ('Does not reconcile entries with grids or infer active riders') differentiate it from sibling grid/classification tools without ambiguity.

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 by the exclusions: an agent can infer that grid reconciliation belongs to a different tool. However, no alternative tool is named and no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use condition is spelled out beyond the implicit category-context prerequisite.

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