Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

nba_team_on_off

Retrieve a team's on-court/off-court player splits, including minutes and rating impact, to compare how players perform while on versus off the court.

Instructions

Returns a team's on-court/off-court player splits: the on-court and off-court rows the upstream computes, with each player's minutes and rating impact. Returns a team's on-court/off-court player splits: the on-court and off-court rows the upstream computes, with each player's minutes and rating impact.

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": {
      "team_id": "<team_id>"
    },
    "name": "nba_team_on_off"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seasonNoOptional season in YYYY-YY form; defaults to the current NBA season.
team_idYesRequired team id from nba-standings.
per_modeNoOptional aggregation.
league_idNoOptional league id; only 00 (NBA) is verified.
season_typeNoOptional season type.
measure_typeNoOptional statistic family.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only restates the return shape and says nothing about data freshness, whether results are cached, error behavior for invalid team_id/season, or what 'rating impact' means (which rating family). For a tool with zero annotation coverage this is a real gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is duplicated verbatim, which is pure waste and suggests an unedited definition. The sentence itself is front-loaded and reasonably tight, but half the text carries zero new information.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should describe the returned structure in more detail than it does. It sketches on-court/off-court rows and per-player minutes/rating impact, which is directionally useful, but the vague 'rating impact' and the missing caveats leave the agent under-informed.

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%, and four parameters are enums, so the schema already defines season format, per_mode, league_id, and season_type. The description adds the concept of on-court vs off-court rows and per-player minutes, but gives no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. 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 names a specific verb and resource: it returns a team's on-court/off-court player splits, plus per-player minutes and rating impact. An agent can tell this is a splits/impact tool rather than a box score or roster. It does not, however, differentiate itself from plausible siblings such as nba_lineups or nba_team_stats, so it stops 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 Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (for example, that team_id comes from nba-standings), and no alternative named. The team_id schema field mentions nba-standings, but the description itself offers no routing help for choosing between this and the many other team-level stats tools.

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