Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Tennis Evolution

Tennis Evolution

by bobobo2026
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Show free/Pro status

license_status
Read-only

Check whether a Pro licence is active, view free-tier limits, and get the pricing URL to confirm access before using Tennis Evolution.

Instructions

Whether a Pro licence is active, the free-tier limits and the pricing URL.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "license_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful context about the returned licence information, but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or output formatting.

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 single sentence is front-loaded with the core status information and adds the free-tier limits and pricing URL without unnecessary words.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only status tool with no output schema, the description provides enough information about what is returned. It could be more complete by explicitly noting when to prefer it over activate_license, but the essential context is present.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The baseline score for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 identifies the tool as a licence-status check, listing the specific information returned: Pro licence activity, free-tier limits, and pricing URL. It is distinguishable from activate_license by name, but the description does not explicitly contrast the two.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus activate_license or other siblings. The description only states what information is available, leaving the agent to infer that this is a read-only status check.

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