Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

openf1_starting_grid

Retrieve Formula 1 starting grid data including grid position, driver number, and qualifying lap time, keyed by qualifying session for matching with the correct session.

Instructions

OpenF1 Formula 1 starting grid. Returns the grid for an upcoming or completed race: grid position, driver number and the qualifying lap duration that set it, published a few minutes after the official results. The rows are keyed by the qualifying session_key that set the grid, not the race session_key; pair this route with the matching openf1-sessions row.

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_starting_grid"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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, lap_duration.
`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

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description steps up usefully: it discloses data freshness ('published a few minutes after the official results') and a non-obvious keying quirk (rows keyed by the qualifying session_key, not the race session_key). That keying warning is exactly the kind of trap that causes wrong calls. Not covered: response behavior when the grid is not yet published, pagination, or rate limits.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource, then the payload, then the keying caveat. Every sentence carries information an agent needs, and the critical warning sits before the pairing instruction rather than buried at the end.

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 six-parameter, all-optional read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description does the heavy lifting: it lists the returned fields and the freshness window, and resolves the session-key ambiguity. It is only slightly short on edge cases such as empty results for a race whose qualifying has not happened.

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%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds genuine meaning the schema lacks: the session_key/meeting_key filters must be read as the qualifying session that set the grid, and the sibling openf1-sessions lookup is named for resolving them. That reframes two of the six parameters in a way the schema text does not.

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 resource (OpenF1 Formula 1 starting grid) and enumerates what a row contains: grid position, driver number, and the qualifying lap duration that set it. It is clearly distinct from telemetry siblings like openf1_car_data, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the similarly named formula1_driver_grid or formula1_team_grid.

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 context is implied rather than stated: it covers 'an upcoming or completed race' and should be paired with the matching openf1-sessions row. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance against the other grid or session-result tools, so the agent must infer selection from names alone.

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

Deploy Server