Skip to main content
Glama
Silverkazimi

splinterlands-mcp

by Silverkazimi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

land_resources_titles_assigned

Retrieve all public title assignments for a given land title. Pass the title as a query parameter to view player, avatar, league, and created_date.

Instructions

List the public title-assignment rows the upstream returns for one title, as GET /land/resources/titles/assigned?title= returns them. The title is a query parameter. A successful response is {status, data}, where data is an array of rows carrying title, player, created_date, avatar_id, league and modern_league. The title, player and created_date fields are strings or a timestamp string, and avatar_id, league and modern_league are JSON numbers; this server returns them unchanged. Warden and warden both succeeded. WARDEN returned HTTP 500, the same response as a nonexistent title and as a missing title parameter. A 500 does not establish whether the title exists. This route is not generally case-insensitive: two casings were observed to work and one failed. This tool sends the argument's case exactly as supplied and does not normalise it, because normalising toward an untested form could turn a working call into a 500. This tool reports the rows returned by the upstream and nothing else.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers: it discloses HTTP 500 behavior for nonexistent titles and missing parameters, case-sensitivity quirks, exact-pass-through casing without normalization, and that it reports only upstream rows. This is unusually rich and operationally useful transparency.

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 long but front-loads the core purpose and response shape before diving into edge cases. The Warden casing example is somewhat redundant with the later case-sensitivity sentence, but the information density is high and nearly every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fully explains the success response shape, row fields and types, error semantics, case-sensitivity caveats, and the tool's intentionally narrow contract. An agent has enough context to call this correctly and interpret the result without extra structure.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single title parameter. It adds that title is a query parameter, that casing is passed exactly as supplied, and that no normalization is performed beyond the schema's string/minLength constraint. It could define what a valid title value is, but for one parameter this is largely sufficient.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: it lists public title-assignment rows that the upstream returns for one title, and names the exact endpoint and query parameter. This clearly distinguishes the tool's scope from the many sibling land_resources tools, even before looking at 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 Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for querying a single title's assignments, but it never references an alternative sibling such as land_resources_titles or states when not to use this tool. With over 170 siblings, the lack of explicit routing guidance is a meaningful gap.

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