Skip to main content
Glama
DanielTomaro13

sportsdata-mcp

laliga_squad

Retrieve a club's current squad with player details: name, date of birth, country, height, photos, position, shirt number, opta ID, and loan status. Requires club slug and subscription key.

Instructions

A club's CURRENT squad — each entry has person (name, date_of_birth, country, height), photos, position id, shirt_number, opta_id, loan status. (The subscription arg is required by the API but the roster returned is the current one, not season-historical.)

Returns: {total, squads:[{id, opta_id, person:{name, date_of_birth, country, height}, photos, position, shirt_number, role, current, loan}]}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYes
subscriptionYes
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that the tool returns a current squad, includes the response structure, and notes the subscription quirk. It does not mention permissions or rate limits, but it is a read operation and the description is sufficiently transparent for a tool with no annotations.

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 description is concise, with three sentences covering purpose, fields, and the subscription note. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the key aspects: purpose, response structure, and subscription nuance. However, the missing explanation of the slug parameter leaves a gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the parameters. It explains subscription (required but not affecting results) but does not describe the slug parameter, leaving its meaning and source unclear.

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?

The description clearly states it returns the current squad of a club, listing the fields included. It distinguishes from sibling tools like laliga_team and laliga_player by specifying 'squad' and 'current'.

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 explains that the subscription parameter is required but does not affect the result, and that the roster is current, not historical. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like laliga_team or laliga_players_stats.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DanielTomaro13/sportsdata-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server