Skip to main content
Glama
isco-tec
by isco-tec

get_sdk_snippet

Returns a ready-to-paste code snippet for submitting scores or initializing the SDK, tailored to your game’s auth and hosting setup. Supports anti-cheat, OAuth, and server-side languages.

Instructions

Call this whenever the developer asks how to submit a score, initialize the SDK, or integrate a leaderboard into their code — INCLUDING when they want a setup other than the default: anti-cheat (server-validated scores), OAuth player identity, or a non-TypeScript server. Returns a ready-to-paste integration snippet (the snippet field) tailored to the axis arguments. Omit the axis args for the simplest anonymous + client-only TypeScript setup; set hostingPattern='client_with_server' (+ a serverLanguage and/or auth provider) for the secure anti-cheat path. Use it right after bootstrap_leaderboard, or any time the developer needs the integration code again or wants to switch approach. (For the drop-in widget HTML embed, bootstrap_leaderboard returns it as snippets.widget.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gameIdYesUUID of the game
boardIdYesUUID of the board to target in the snippet
playerIdentityStrategyNoHow players are attributed. 'anonymous' (default) mints a local UUID, no PII; 'prompted_local' asks once and saves to localStorage; 'auth_provider' uses OAuth (also set authProvider); 'server_authoritative' has the game server attach the playerId (needs hostingPattern client_with_server or server_only); 'custom_callback' for a dev-supplied function.
authProviderNoRequired when playerIdentityStrategy is 'auth_provider'. supabase/clerk/auth0/firebase get a server-side JWT-verifying secure-submit endpoint (real anti-cheat); google ships a browser helper; github/apple/discord are planned; custom is the escape hatch.
hostingPatternNoIntegrity model. 'client_only' (default): the browser holds the public key — simplest, but NO anti-cheat. 'client_with_server': your server validates + signs scores — use this for competitive boards where cheating matters. 'server_only': server reads/writes and renders SSR HTML (max integrity, SEO-friendly, no widget).
serverLanguageNoLanguage for the server-side snippet. Required for hostingPattern 'server_only'; optional for 'client_with_server' (defaults to typescript, which gets the turnkey createScoreSubmitHandler endpoint). python/go/csharp return a best-effort snippet.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that the tool tailors the snippet based on axis arguments and returns a snippet field. However, it does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits, which would be needed for a 5.

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 a single paragraph that effectively conveys key information without unnecessary words. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is still concise and front-loaded.

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?

Given the complexity (6 params, 4 enums, no output schema), the description covers primary use cases, distinguishes from siblings, and explains what the output contains. It does not mention potential errors or edge cases, but is sufficiently complete for most scenarios.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how omission of axis args leads to simplest setup and gives context for each hostingPattern/playerIdentityStrategy beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool returns a ready-to-paste integration snippet for submitting scores, initializing SDK, or integrating a leaderboard. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool bootstrap_leaderboard by noting that the latter returns a drop-in widget HTML embed.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to call: whenever the developer asks about integration, after bootstrap_leaderboard, or anytime they need the code again. Provides guidance on omitting arguments for simplest setup and when to use specific hostingPattern values.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/isco-tec/scorezilla-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server