Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

wta_tournament_players

Retrieve a WTA tournament's published entry list by group ID and year, returning singles, doubles, qualifying entries, seeds, status flags, and participant IDs/country codes in source order.

Instructions

Read a WTA tournament's published entry list. Returns every published event and entry in source order, preserving singles, doubles teams, qualifying entries, string seeds and native status flags. Only professional participant IDs/names/country codes are retained. The native tournament context is validated before accepting this context-less roster resource. No draw reconciliation, active-player filtering or inferred winner status is added.

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": {
      "group_id": "<group_id>",
      "year": "<year>"
    },
    "name": "wta_tournament_players"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearYesNative season from tournament season discovery
group_idYesNative tournament group ID from the calendar

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does substantial work: it declares the operation a read, states that source ordering is preserved, that seeds and native status flags are retained untouched, and that only professional participant IDs/names/country codes survive. It also discloses a validation precondition on the native tournament context, though it does not say what happens when that validation fails or 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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct fact about ordering, field retention, or excluded derivations. A few phrasings are jargon-heavy redundancies ("context-less roster resource", the doubled emphasis on "native" validation), which cost it the top mark.

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 read-only two-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, in what order, and which fields are preserved or stripped, which is what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. The only real gap is failure/validation behavior and result shape, which is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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% and both parameters already document their origin ("Native season from tournament season discovery", "Native tournament group ID from the calendar"). The description adds only the general notion that the native tournament context is validated, without clarifying accepted value ranges or what makes an ID invalid, so it stays at the baseline for schema-backed parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Read a WTA tournament's published entry list" gives a specific verb and resource, and the following sentence enumerates exactly what is returned (events, entries, singles, doubles teams, qualifying, seeds, status flags). The closing line ("No draw reconciliation, active-player filtering or inferred winner status") separates it from the draw- and results-oriented siblings without needing their schemas.

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 is implied by the scope statement and by the exclusion list (no draw reconciliation, no active-player filtering), which tells an agent this is the raw published roster rather than a filtered or results-joined view. However, no sibling is named and there is no explicit "use X instead when..." sentence, so the routing decision is left partly to inference.

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