Skip to main content
Glama
ProjectMakersDE

horizOn MCP Server

Official
by ProjectMakersDE
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Match Limits

horizon_get_match_limits
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a player's five-tier match limits and project capabilities to guide explicit asynchronous multiplayer actions and reconcile them with match data.

Instructions

Reads the player's five-tier limits and project capabilities. Use when: explicit asynchronous multiplayer actions after reading horizon://docs/matches. Not for: automatic polling, page traversal, timeout progression, invented winners or automatic rewards. Reconcile with horizon_get_matches and horizon_get_match. Consent and game consensus do not validate honest gameplay. Requires: userId and the player's session: sign in with horizon_signin_email or horizon_signin_anonymous and pass its accessToken as sessionToken. Side effects: Read only. Respect pollAfterSeconds on refresh. Retained state is not truncated after System Config reductions. Returns: {limits,config,capabilities,pollAfterSeconds,serverTime}; limits include activeMatches,stateBytes,retainedMatches,pendingInvites,settlementMatches,historyRetentionSeconds,rankedSettlementSeconds. Zero completed history is valid. Errors: 404 hides private/missing/expired matches. 409 REVISION_CONFLICT or STATE_CONFLICT: explicitly reread and reconcile the original intent, never replace the revision or automatically resubmit. RESULT_CONFLICT preserves the original report. RUN_EXPIRED/RUN_ALREADY_USED never allow replacement ranked runs. 501 FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED is explicit for simpleServer ranked mode. 401 means the session is missing or expired: sign in again and retry with the new accessToken. 403 for a session means the token belongs to another user: pass the userId that signed in. Needs HORIZON_API_KEY. Every failure returns an error result (isError) with the HTTP status and body: a 401 that horizon_test_connection also returns means HORIZON_API_KEY is wrong, 429 means the account's per-minute rate limit was reached (wait a minute, then retry).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesActive player matching the session and project
sessionTokenYesPlayer accessToken sent only as Bearer

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context—session/auth requirements, pollAfterSeconds refresh cadence, retained-state semantics, HORIZON_API_KEY and 429 rate limits—but its error list includes 409 conflict/run-expired cases that seem inapplicable to this read endpoint, so it is strong but slightly muddied.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is front-loaded and labeled, but at roughly 300 words for a two-parameter read it is over-long. The error catalog includes conditions such as REVISION_CONFLICT and RUN_EXPIRED that appear copied from mutation/result tools and do not obviously apply here, so not every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates return fields (limits, config, capabilities, pollAfterSeconds, serverTime) and auth requirements. It covers enough for an agent to call correctly, though the over-broad error section slightly reduces precision.

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% and both parameters are documented. The description adds practical auth semantics—sign in via horizon_signin_email or horizon_signin_anonymous and pass accessToken as sessionToken—beyond the schema's field 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 opening 'Reads the player's five-tier limits and project capabilities' is a specific verb+resource, and the return summary reinforces scope. It references match siblings, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from horizon_get_chat_limits or horizon_get_marketplace_limits, keeping it from a 5.

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 explicit 'Not for' exclusions and names horizon_get_matches and horizon_get_match for reconciliation. The positive 'Use when' is vague ('explicit asynchronous multiplayer actions after reading docs'), so an agent must infer the exact trigger.

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