Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
掌锤公开查询 MCP

掌锤公开查询 MCP

by Vper496
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_faction_analysis

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a faction's overall record, opponents, and version performance from published reports, filtered by event start date and returned as raw or weighted win rates.

Instructions

查询种族页同口径的总战绩、对手及版本表现；日期按赛事开始日筛选，保留原始/加权胜率。

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": {
      "faction_id": "<faction_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_faction_analysis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNoindividual
date_toNo
date_fromNo
mfm_groupNo
faction_idYes
release_idNo
dataset_revisionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context ('日期按赛事开始日筛选' and '保留原始/加权胜率'), which clarifies filtering basis and return semantics beyond the 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?

A single dense sentence with the core data scope front-loaded before the date-filtering and win-rate caveats. No wasted text, though the density comes at the cost of parameter detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

A 7-parameter tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage needs the description to explain params, but it addresses only date filtering and win-rate presentation. Format enum, release/dataset identifiers, and mfm_group are all left undocumented.

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 7 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description only clarifies date semantics (filtered by event start date). It leaves format (individual/team), mfm_group, release_id, dataset_revision, and even faction_id unexplained, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (查询) and resource set (总战绩、对手及版本表现) scoped to the faction page, which distinguishes it from faction-scoped siblings like get_faction_detachments and get_faction_units. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives, but the content scope is clear.

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 lists what data is returned but gives no when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and never references siblings such as get_matchups or get_report that could overlap. An agent must infer selection from the content list alone.

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