Skip to main content
Glama
DanielTomaro13

sportsdata-mcp

wta_rankings

Retrieve WTA singles or doubles rankings with player details, points, and movement. Specify rank type and metric for targeted results.

Instructions

The WTA rankings — each row is {player:{id, fullName, countryCode, dateOfBirth}, ranking, points, tournamentsPlayed, movement, rankedAt}. Returns a bare ARRAY (not the {pageInfo,content} envelope). REQUIRES type + metric, which must agree: rankSingles+singles or rankDoubles+doubles. Page with page/pageSize (e.g. pageSize=100 for the top 100).

Returns: array of {player:{id, firstName, lastName, fullName, countryCode, dateOfBirth}, ranking, points, tournamentsPlayed, movement, rankedAt}

Example: Top 100 WTA singles rankings

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
typeYes
metricYes
pageSizeNo
Behavior4/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses that the response is a bare array (not enveloped) and details the returned fields. This adds context beyond the schema, though it could mention if any authorization is needed or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (about 5 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description fully specifies the return structure, required parameters, pagination, and an example. It is complete for a straightforward read-only tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains each parameter: 'type' and 'metric' with valid pairings, 'page' and 'pageSize' with defaults and example usage. This compensates well for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 clearly states that the tool returns WTA rankings with a specific row structure. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('WTA rankings'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like wta_player or wta_tournament, though the unique purpose is evident.

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 the required parameters 'type' and 'metric' and their constraint to agree (e.g., rankSingles+singles). It also mentions pagination with page/pageSize. However, it does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions.

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