mcp-f1

Get Pit Stops

get_pit_stops

Fetch pit stop and pit lane passage data for an F1 session, then filter by driver, lap number, date, or lane duration.

Instructions

Fetch pit lane passes for an F1 session from OpenF1.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date_to`	No
`date_from`	No
`lap_number`	No	int — optional, >= 1. Exact lap of the stop (do not combine with lap_number_min/max).
`session_key`	No	int \| str — required in practice, positive int or 'latest'. Session identifier; use get_sessions to discover it.
`driver_number`	No	int — optional, 1-99. Driver number for the season.
`lap_number_max`	No
`lap_number_min`	No
`lane_duration_max`	No
`lane_duration_min`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Only 'Fetch' implies a read operation; it does not disclose the practical need for session_key, permissions, pagination, filtering behavior, or side effects.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no padding. It is concise, though that conciseness reflects under-specification rather than completeness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a 9-parameter tool with no annotations and low schema coverage, the description omits required session_key context, usage guidance, and parameter semantics.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The tool has 9 parameters, but schema description coverage is only 33%, and the description adds no parameter meaning. It does not compensate for undocumented filters like lane_duration_min/max or lap_number_min/max.

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?

Specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'pit lane passes' with scope 'F1 session' and source 'OpenF1', so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not distinguish itself from sibling data tools such as get_laps or get_stints.

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?

No explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative tool guidance. The phrase 'for an F1 session' implies context but does not tell an agent when to choose this tool over siblings.

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