Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

nfhs_publisher

Retrieve a single NFHS Network publisher by key to access identity, state coverage, colors, social links, subscription flags, and related producers for event or school records.

Instructions

Get one NFHS Network publisher. Returns one publisher record by key: identity, type, state-association linkage, state coverage, colours, social links, network/subscription flags and related producers. Publisher keys appear in an event's publishers list and in school records. Use nfhs-producer for the producer behind a publisher. Device and contact data is not part of this contract.

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": {
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "nfhs_publisher"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesPublisher key, for example cdb81ad6cb

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does useful work by enumerating what the record contains (identity, type, association linkage, coverage, colours, socials, subscription flags, related producers) and by explicitly excluding device and contact data. It does not say what happens on an unknown or malformed key, whether the call can fail, or whether any auth is required.

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 identity of the tool and its return shape are front-loaded, and the sibling routing and scope exclusion come last where they belong. The middle enumeration of returned fields is dense but each item is informative. No filler sentences.

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-key read with no output schema, the description compensates well by listing the record's contents and stating a negative boundary. Missing only failure behavior and any auth/permission note, which keeps it short of full completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is already documented with an example, so the baseline would be 3. The description earns more by explaining where publisher keys are surfaced in the wider data model (event publisher lists, school records), which the schema does not state.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ("Get one NFHS Network publisher") and immediately narrows the scope to a single-record keyed lookup. It also explicitly separates itself from the nearest sibling: "Use nfhs-producer for the producer behind a publisher." An agent can distinguish this from nfhs_producer and the plural list tools without opening the schema.

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?

It tells the agent where the required key comes from ("Publisher keys appear in an event's publishers list and in school records"), which is genuinely actionable routing guidance. It also names one alternative tool and when to prefer it. What it lacks is a broader when-not statement, such as what to do if only a name is known (search/suggest 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