Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

openf1_session_result

Fetch Formula 1 session classifications with final positions, laps, points, DNF/DNS/DSQ flags, and leader gaps; filter by meeting, session, driver, position, or status.

Instructions

OpenF1 Formula 1 session classification. Returns the classification published a few minutes after the official results: final position, laps completed, DNF/DNS/DSQ flags, points for races, and duration and gap to the leader, which are single numbers for a race and Q1/Q2/Q3 arrays for practice and qualifying.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "openf1_session_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dnf`	No	Only drivers who did not finish
`dns`	No	Only drivers who did not start
`dsq`	No	Only disqualified drivers
`filter`	No	Repeatable upstream filter written as <attribute><operator><value>, with operators >=, <=, =, > and <. Repeated filters on the same attribute are OR'ed, a lower and upper bound form an inclusive range, and different attributes are AND'ed. Filterable attributes on this route: meeting_key, session_key, position, driver_number, number_of_laps, points, dnf, dns, dsq.
`meeting_key`	No	Positive meeting key from openf1-meetings, or `latest` for the current meeting example(1299)
`session_key`	No	Positive session key from openf1-sessions, or `latest` for the current session example(11408)
`position_gte`	No	Inclusive minimum position, starting at 1
`position_lte`	No	Inclusive maximum position, starting at 1 example(3)
`driver_number`	No	Positive permanent driver number (see openf1-drivers) example(1)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.17.20Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does this well by disclosing data latency ('a few minutes after the official results') and return-field semantics (duration and gap appear as single numbers for a race, but as Q1/Q2/Q3 arrays for practice and qualifying). However, it says nothing about request behavior, pagination, rate limits, or whether omitted sessions return empty results.

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 two tight sentences with the resource stated first and the return format second, and no padding. The second sentence is long but each clause about flags, points, and the duration/gap representation conveys a distinct fact.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description must describe return values, and it does so concisely and accurately for the most confusing fields. Minor gaps remain: how rows are keyed (driver vs. session), ordering guarantees, and behavior when called before classification is published are not addressed, but for a read-only results endpoint this is close to sufficient.

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 all nine parameters, including the repeatable filter grammar and the `latest` shortcut, are already documented in the schema. The description explains the output shape (numbers versus arrays), not parameter meaning, so it adds little beyond what the schema already provides; the baseline of 3 is correct.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns the OpenF1 Formula 1 session classification, and it lists exactly which fields come back (position, laps, DNF/DNS/DSQ, points, duration/gap). It doesn't distinguish itself by name from adjacent tools such as openf1_position or openf1_session_results, so an agent must infer the boundary from context, but the purpose itself is unambiguous.

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?

The phrase 'published a few minutes after the official results' implicitly tells the agent when the data is valid, which suggests it is not for live timing. However, there is no explicit guidance about alternatives (for example, to use openf1_position for live running order), and there are no described prerequisites or exclusions; usage must be inferred rather than read.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server