Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official

speedrun_game_leaderboard

Retrieve a full-game speedrun leaderboard with native placements, tied runs, and game, category, and level context. Use it to fetch ranked runs by game and category with optional filters.

Instructions

Get a Speedrun full-game leaderboard. Returns native places, tied runs and game/category/level context. top counts places, not runs. IDs come from game/category/level discovery; platform/region use catalog discovery. Game variables expose value IDs and scope; requested variables are checked against this board's native applicable-variable embedding. No local ranking or synthetic pagination is performed.

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": {
      "game": "<game>",
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "speedrun_game_leaderboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNoTop places, 1–200; API response-budget limit, ties can return more runs
dateNoRun date cutoff YYYY-MM-DD
gameYesNative game ID
embedNoNative metadata embeds
regionNoNative region ID from catalogs
timingNoNative timing method; omission uses source default
categoryYesNative category ID appropriate to this board
platformNoNative platform ID from catalogs
emulatorsNoOmit for both; true for emulators, false for real devices
variablesNoJSON object mapping native variable IDs to value IDs
video_onlyNoRequire a video when true; omission uses source default

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does a fair job: it discloses that 'top counts places, not runs', that ties can inflate the returned run count, that no local ranking or synthetic pagination happens, and that requested variables are validated against the board's native applicable-variable embedding. Gaps remain around error behavior when validation fails and what the response envelope looks like.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by return shape, then parameter caveats, then an explicit negative statement about pagination. Dense but every sentence carries information; the phrasing around 'native applicable-variable embedding' is jargon-heavy for the value it conveys.

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 an 11-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical subtleties (place-vs-run counting, ties, ID sources, variable validation, no synthetic pagination). What it omits is the response shape, which normally would fall to an output schema that does not exist here, so the definition is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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 baseline would be 3; the description earns an upgrade by adding meaning the schema does not carry: 'top counts places, not runs', ID provenance for game/category/level vs platform/region, and the fact that game variables expose value IDs and scope. It does not clarify the interaction between 'date' and ranking or the 'embed' semantics beyond what the enum already says.

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 ('Get a Speedrun full-game leaderboard') and the 'full-game' qualifier implicitly separates it from the sibling level-leaderboard tool. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation requires the agent to know what a 'level leaderboard' would be.

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 description supplies an ID-provenance chain ('IDs come from game/category/level discovery; platform/region use catalog discovery'), which is real prerequisite guidance for calling the tool correctly. However, it never states when to prefer a different leaderboard tool (e.g. the level or category-records siblings) or when this tool is the wrong choice, so the when-to-use guidance is implied rather than stated.

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