Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pgatour_tournament_past_results

Retrieve PGA Tour tournament past results and available-season entries by supplying the canonical year, slug, and full tournament ID from tournament-link discovery.

Instructions

Get PGA Tour tournament past results. Returns the source default historical results and every native available-season entry. The resolved results ID can refer to a previous year; no year selector is invented. Supply canonical year, slug and full tournament ID from tournament-link discovery. Other tours and team-event variants are not qualified by this local 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": {
      "year": "<year>",
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "pgatour_tournament_past_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Full native main-tour tournament ID, for example R2026457
`slug`	Yes	Canonical main-tour tournament URL slug from schedule
`year`	Yes	Canonical tournament URL year, matching the full ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.17.20Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns source-default historical results plus available-season entries and that the resolved results ID may refer to a previous year, but it does not describe response format, pagination, or failure behavior.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the description is reasonably sized. Some phrasing such as 'source default historical results,' 'native available-season entry,' and 'local contract' is dense, but each sentence still communicates scope or constraints.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should clarify return behavior more concretely. It explains the general result scope and season behavior, but the exact returned structure remains vague for an agent that needs to consume the results.

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 defines all three parameters well. The description adds provenance by saying values should come from tournament-link discovery, but it does not add much individual parameter meaning beyond that sourcing note.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get PGA Tour tournament past results.' It clearly scopes the tool to historical PGA Tour results, but it does not explicitly name or distinguish the nearby tournament tools such as leaderboard or overview.

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 gives useful prerequisites by requiring canonical year, slug, and full tournament ID from tournament-link discovery. It also excludes other tours and team-event variants, though it does not explicitly say when to use this rather than a sibling tournament tool.

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

Deploy Server