Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

openligadb_league_team_matches

Retrieve a team's matches for one league season by matching a partial team-name fragment; use exact team names and IDs for precision, since numeric-only fragments are rejected.

Instructions

Find a team's matches in one league season. Returns matches in one league season whose team name matches a partial text fragment. Use openligadb_teams for exact team names and ids. Numeric fragments are rejected because the upstream path assigns numeric segments to matchday ids.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seasonYesSeason starting year
team_filterYesPartial team-name text; numeric-only values are not accepted
league_shortcutYesExact shortcut from openligadb-leagues

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.18

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses real behavioral traits: fuzzy/partial matching, rejection of numeric-only input, and the upstream reason for that rejection (numeric path segments are matchday ids). But it does not say anything about result ordering, completeness across matchdays, or empty-result behavior, all of which matter for a lookup with no output schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose before the alternative-tool pointer and the constraint rationale. All content is relevant, though the final clause about matchday path segments is slightly wordier than needed to convey the constraint.

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?

For a simple three-required-parameter lookup with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and input behavior but leaves a gap around what the agent gets back: no mention of ordering, whether all matchdays are included, or whether unpaged full results are returned. The alternative-tool guidance is good, but return expectations remain unspecified.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds meaning for team_filter by explaining partial-fragment matching and the numeric rejection rationale. It adds nothing beyond the schema for season or league_shortcut.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: matches for one team in one league season, and clarifies the matching is by partial name fragment. It distinguishes itself from openligadb_teams, but says nothing about how it differs from other team-match siblings such as openligadb_matches_by_team, openligadb_team_pair_matches, or openligadb_last_team_match, which is the main ambiguity an agent faces here.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to openligadb_teams when it needs exact names or ids, which is a clear when-to-use elsewhere rule. It also warns that numeric-only fragments are rejected, which prevents a predictable failed call. It stops short of stating exclusions relative to the other team-match variants.

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